A middle way for Legislative Council: Finding balance in legislature’s ‘own role’

“What role the Legislative Council (LegCo) should play in our executive-led system continues to spark controversy. Lawmakers themselves are discussing the issue, which is a healthy sign. The eighth Legislative Council’s first meeting on January 14, 2025. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP. Central authorities have also spoken indirectly on LegCo’s role. On January 26, the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office head Xia Baolong pointed out that executive-led government in Hong Kong means that each branch – executive, legislative, and judicial – performs its “own role and cooperates and coordinates with each other.” According to Article 64 of the Basic Law, LegCo’s role includes holding the government to account. This means asking questions, asking for justification of government action, investigating government actions and inactions, and, when necessary, sanctioning government officials for policy failures. According to the Powers and Privileges Ordinance (Cap 382), enacted in 1985, with the select and investigation committee system, as well as the system of policy panels, LegCo has the capacity to fulfil its “own role.” It is precisely how to understand LegCo’s “own role” that has sparked controversy. First, may LegCo use the tools it has to hold the government to account? The central authorities have condemned the way the opposition in LegCo used these tools after 2010. They call it abuse, citing filibustering and other tactics that delayed legislation. The record is clear: the fourth- and fifth-term Legislative Councils passed far fewer bills than either before or after. The sixth-term LegCo was heading in the same direction until the government disqualified some opposition lawmakers , and most of the rest resigned . Moreover, both the central and the city’s authorities accuse the opposition of abusing LegCo’s powers to investigate, and to summon and inquire – precisely those powers legislators still have and need to hold the government to account. The Legislative Council. Photo: Peter Lee/HKFP. In this view, the abuse dates from after 2010 when the opposition and representatives of the central government negotiated a deal over political reform in Hong Kong. It has been downhill ever since, according to Beijing. From 1985 to 2010, LegCo convened six select or investigation committees, which focused on issues of public concern: the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) operations and staff loyalty, the chaotic Chek Lap Kok airport opening, short piling in public housing, SARS, misselling Lehman-Brothers minibonds, and conflicts of interest in the post-retirement employment of civil servants. The result: the government changed course and made improvements in public policy. For example, authorities introduced the Principal Officials Accountability System (POAS) in 2002, which is still with us today. LegCo’s work and the results of an expert committee investigation on the SARS outbreak in 2003-04 better prepared us for the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. These positive results are undeniable. Even in the post-2010 period, pressure from LegCo to investigate sometimes had positive results. In 2015, for example, responding to public concern expressed in the legislature, the government established a commission of inquiry into lead in drinking water in some public housing estates . Again, the government changed course. Second, authorities tell us that executive-led government means that LegCo and the executive should “cooperate” and “coordinate.” Does this mean that legislators may not criticise government policy? Reporting indicates that many LegCo members perceive this to be the case. Remember Chief Executive John Lee’s harsh rebuke of LegCo member Paul Tse’s criticism of government policy in the first “patriots-only” seventh-term LegCo? The chief executive deemed such criticism “dangerous,” similar to the “soft resistance” of the much-criticised opposition and must be “stamped out.” The few government critics in the seventh-term LegCo all left the body in 2025. More recently, consider the Hospital Authority’s (HA) rebuke after LegCo members Gary Chan, Rebecca Chan, and David Lam expressed concerns that residents might not have collected their HA-provided medication because of increased charges. (A sidenote: Rebecca Chan served as a political assistant in the Food and Health Bureau from 2012 to 2017.) The Hospital Authority logo. Photo: Tom Grundy/HKFP. The legislators drew attention to the very figure disclosed by the Health Bureau: that 26,000 public hospital prescriptions were uncollected after the new fee regime was introduced in January. However, rather than listening and investigating, the HA said the remarks were “untruthful.” The government apparently prefers to send legislators “warm reminders” on many issues of public concern, in effect telling them to shut up. Precisely because no lawmaker spoke up when LegCo deliberated the bus seatbelt issue in September 2025, the policy resulted in a fiasco . The public needs a legislature that is engaged, open, and responsibly critical of government action – this is the minimum required to perform its “own role.” Of course, LegCo should cooperate and coordinate with the government, but to do so should not compromise the legislature’s “own role.” Hong Kong needs a middle way for LegCo – somewhere between the dysfunction seen from the 2014 Umbrella Movement through the 2019 protests and a rubber stamp. We have experienced a middle way, for example, from 1985 to at least 2010. At the time, as noted above, LegCo investigations played an important role in improving public policy. Hong Kong people value this kind of LegCo role. It benefits the government and the community, building trust and legitimacy. Authorities should trust their own gatekeeping in selecting patriotic LegCo members. Many LegCo members seem to understand that they should play a more active role. The government should realise that it cannot do everything alone. Effective governance is co-produced. Authorities need to recognise the legitimacy of a middle way, a more authentic role for LegCo. We will all benefit. HKFP is an impartial platform & does not necessarily share the views of opinion writers or advertisers. HKFP presents a diversity of views & regularly invites figures across the political spectrum to write for us. Press freedom is guaranteed under the Basic Law, security law, Bill of Rights and Chinese constitution. Opinion pieces aim to constructively point out errors or defects in the government, law or policies, or aim to suggest ideas or alterations via legal means without an intention of hatred, discontent or hostility against the authorities or other communities.

Summary generated from the RSS feed of HKFP. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on hongkongfp.com.