By South China Morning Post | Created at 2025-03-31 01:31:23 | Updated at 2025-04-01 19:14:29
1 day ago
The quality of our Legislative Council and the performance of lawmakers have come into focus in recent weeks. Closed-door discussions held on the sidelines of the annual “two sessions” in Beijing revealed that the central government had taken issue with the ability of Hong Kong’s lawmakers to deliver results and make constructive contributions. And the tea leaf readings over what it all meant have now morphed into a full-blown storm in a teacup inside the chamber.
Last week, the president of the council adjourned a meeting ahead of time because lawmaker Tommy Cheung Yu-yan decided to not move his member motion – on reviewing the effectiveness of small class teaching in primary and secondary schools – effectively cutting off the debate that was supposed to follow. Another veteran lawmaker, Paul Tse Wai-chun, interrupted the proceedings by raising a point of order.
The rare drama amid the absence of opposition in the chamber is worth noting. Legco members have few chances each term to table motions that do not have legislative effect. These are opportunities for members to raise issues they feel are important and of public concern.
So, why did Cheung decide not to move his motion? Clearly, the issue was something he felt was important enough to bring up for debate in Legco.
The motion itself is straightforward enough: “That this council urges the government to comprehensively review the effectiveness of the small class teaching mode in primary and secondary schools”, according to the English translation.
Cheung backtracked because fellow lawmaker Chu Kwok-keung had submitted an amendment to the original motion that struck out nine of Cheung’s 22 words and added almost 100 words of his own. Cheung said that had effectively changed the original intent and meaning of his motion, and accused Chu of hijacking his member motion.
