The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (Draft) Consultation Report/Volume 1/Annex 1
Issues relating to public opinion polls
1. Introduction
The Consultative Committee for the Basic Law (CCBL) is a non-governmental consultative organization. According to its Constitution, it should "conduct democratic consultations and receive diverse views" by "seeking common ground while reserving differences, not insisting on unanimity, nor deciding matters by voting". As regards the actual methods of consultation, members of the public have suggested that the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll or a referendum to gauge public opinion. Similar requests hae also been put forward by members of the CCBL. Although it was suggested in the first round of consultations in 1988 that the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll or hold a referendum to gauge the opinions of people in Hong Kong on the Draft Basic Law for Solicitation of Opinions, the proposal was not adopted by the CCBL. Instead, the results of the public opinion polls conducted by outside bodies and organizations were presented as an annex to the consultation report for submission to the Drafting Committee. The CCBL did not comment or elaborate on the methods or the results of these opinion polls. Before the second round of consultations rommenced m early 1989, the special groups of the CCBL held meetings to discuss the consultation on the Basic Law (Draft). At these meetings, some members proposed that the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll or a referendum to gauge the opinions of people in Hong Kong on the Basic Law (Draft) or on some of its sections or chapters, such as that on the political structure. However, there was no unanimous view. Members of the public also put forward quite a number of suggestions regarding this issue. The Executive Committee of the CCBL held four meeting's to discuss the issue which was also put on the agenda for the seventh general meeting of the CCBL. A definite decision on the issue was reached by the Executive Committee of the CCBL at the meeting held on 7 October. The purpose of this paper is to report on the CCBL's discussion on whether or not it should conduct a public opinion poll to gauge the opinions of the public.
2. Public opinion polls and referendums as means of gauging the opinions of the public
2.1 As the consultation on the Basic Law has reached its final stage, some members of the public as well as CCBL members were of the opinion that the CCBL as a consultative organization for the Basic Law should conduct a public opinion poll or a referendum to gauge the inclinations of the public, thus helping the Drafting Committee understand the wishes of Hong Kong people. Although public opinion polls and referendums are completely different in nature, they have been confused and placed on a par in a number of the opinions. Actually, in those opinions which call for a public opinion poll conducted by the CCBL, what is being requested is generally a "sample survey", i.e. to select a sample by statistical methods for interviewing after which the results will be computed. The questionnaire for a sample survey is usually not disclosed to the public in order to minimize the influence of the public opinion on the respondents' emotions; whereas a referendum is the submission of a simple and publicly known issue to the direct vote of the eligible voters after discussion, propaganda or agitation among the public. The problems involved in a referendum are completely different from those in a sample survey. The holding of a referendum requires rules for such procedures as the registration of voters and the voting, which must be conducted in compliance with strict political standards. Since the Basic Law is the business of the Chinese Government while Hong Kong is to remain under British administration prior to 1997, the registration of voters and voting under these circumstances will touch on many complicated political issues. The CCBL as a non-governmental organization is not in a position to carry out the work of this nature. It therefore has not discussed or studied the possibility of holding a referendum, nor has any CCBL member put forward such a request.
2.2 As regards the handling of the results of an opinion poll or a referendum, among those opinions advocating a public opinion poll or a referendum, some maintain that the results should only be for the reference of the Drafting Committee and should not, in any way, be binding. However, there are also opinions which hold that the results should be binding on the Drafting Committee, and should not be for reference only.
3. Factors to be considered when conducting a sample survey
3.1 Method
The "public opinion poll" under discussion in fact refers to a random sample survey by statistical methods. The normal practice is to first design a questionnaire, translating the matters to be studied into a series of simple, clear and direct questions with a number of fixed answers attached to each question. Then by way of random selection, 500 to 6,000 people (in actual cases, the sample size is usually around 1,000 to 3,000 people) will be sampled from the adult population in Hong Kong to answer the questionnaire. Then, the answers given by these people in the questionnaire will be quantified. By means of statistical inference, these results may, within a certain range of deviation, be reckoned to be good estimates of the response of the whole adult population in Hong Kong. On this basis, the proportions of the population who chose the individual fixed answers to the questions presented in the questionnaire are measured. Some of the existing opinions advocating a sample survey are in favour of disclosing the questionnaire before the survey so that people of different opinions can conduct publicity campaigns on these questions. Such a suggestion is against the normal practice of sample surveys. Furthermore, if CCBL members of different political views are allowed to participate in the design of the questionnaire, it will be impossible to keep the questions confidential. But if they are not allowed to participate, the fairness and objectivity of the survey will be queried.
3.2 The role of the CCBL
Since the above-mentioned process involves many technical and operational problems, the major parts of the job cannot be done by the CCBL or its Secretariat itself. So the practical question facing the CCBL is whether the CCBL should commission a professional marketing research company to conduct a territory-wide sample survey to gauge the opinions of people in Hong Kong on certain issues through quantitative means.
3.3 Actual procedures of a sample survey
3.3.1 Establish the objective of the survey
With regard to the existing proposals that a sample survey should be conducted on the Basic Law (Draft), the object ie of such a survey has not been discussed in depth, and no clear and specific objecti^"e has been established. But the following objectives have been mentioned: (1) to find out the preference of members of the public concerning the various political models; (2) to find out to what degree members of the public have accepted the Basic Law (Draft) as a whole; (3) as a means for collecting the opinions of the silent majority; and (1) as a means for giving members of the public a chance to participate in the consultation on the Basic Law. Some of these objectives have common ground while some are contradictory. At the same time, there exists the question as to whether it is possible to achie'e these objectives by a sample survey. But if a survey is to be conducted, the objective must be established before the actual survey can be launched in accordance with this objective.
3.3.2 Define the scope of the survey
The areas covered by the Basic Law (Draft) are very extensive. Some of these areas are highly controversial but some are less so or are even not controversial at all. However, it is still possible to explore or quantify opinions from other angles. Then how should the scope of the survey be defined? There is no common view but it has been suggested that: (1) the survey should be confined to the issues on the political structure; (2) the survey should be confined to the most controversial issues relating to the political structure, such as the alternatives for the selection of the Chief Executive and the formation of the legislature; (3) in addition to the issues on the political structure, the survey should also cover some controversial issues such as that on the relationship between the Central Authorities and the HKSAR; and (4) the survey should cover all issues relating to the Basic Law (Draft).
3.3.3 Design the questionnaire After the objective is established and the scope is defined, it is necessary to translate the relevant contents and controversies and the matters to be explored into a series of questions with several fixed answers provided. The simplest answers are: yes, no, and no comment. Another way is to provide several alternatives for the respondents to choose from. However, if the alternatives are interrelated, it is necessary to simplify them or screen them or rewrite them so that the respondents will easily understand the questions and the meaning of the various answers. This process involves not only technical problems but also the designer's political awareness in respect of these questions because the alternatives presented may be biased by this factor.
3.3.4 Decide on the techniques
{{dent|1em|0| ( 1 ) Sample size -- The sample size has bearing on the reliability and accuracy of the results. The larger the sample, the smaller the error. However, when the sample reaches a certain size, the advantages brought about by additional sample units will diminish. Normally, the maximum effective sample size is about 6,000 units and the minimum size is about 500, depending on the degree of accuracy of the results required by the party who conducts the survey.
( 2 ) Survey method -- The usual survey methods include:
{{dent|1em|0| - Telephone interview: It saves time and is less expensive. However, if the questionnaire is complicated, such a method should not be used as there would be difficulties in quality control.
- Face-to-face interview.}}
(3) Collection and analysis of data -- This is a purely technical procedure.
(4) Interpretation of the results -- With statistical methods, the inclinations of opinions on a certain question shown by people of different occupations, ages, sexes and educational backgrounds are analysed and then an interpretation of the survey results is made. This procedure, on the one hand, involves technical problems and on the other, depends on the analysts' understanding of the political and social implications of that question.}}
With respect to the above-mentioned procedures: (1) the objective of the survey must be established by the commissioning organization; (2) as to the scope of the survey and the design of the questionnaire, there are two possible practices: (i) the commissioning organization decides first and then advice will be given by the research company; or (ii) the research company is solely responsible, e.g. the public opinion poll conducted in 1987 by the Hong Kong Government on the reform of the political structure; (3) the technical aspects are usually decided by the research company in consultation with the commissioning organization; (4) the actual interview and compilation of statistics are carried out by the research company; and (5) as to the interpretation of the results, there are also two possible practices: (i) the results may be analysed by the research company alone; or (ii) they may be analysed jointly by the research company and the commissioning organization.
3.4 Monitoring and quality control
Professional research companies usually have set procedures to control the quality of surveys. However, in view of the controversy caused by the public opinion poll conducted in 1987 by the Hong Kong Government on the reform of the political structure, when proposing that a similar sample survey should be conducted on the Basic Law (Draft), some people suggested that an independent and authoritative monitoring group comprising eminent persons from various sectors should be established to monitor the survey. Only with this practice will the results of the survey be accepted. However, there were no specific proposals on the composition, powers and functions of this monitoring group.
3.5 Expenses
The expenses involved depend on the number of questions to be surveyed and their complexity, the sample size, the survey method and the degree of accuracy required of the results. The expenses will probably be in the range of HK$900,000 to HK$2,000,000.
4. Development of the discussion of the Consultative Committee for the Basic Law on whether it should conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft)
4.1 From 13 to 17 February this year, the special groups of the CCBL held meetings to discuss the consultations on the Basic Law (Draft). At these meetings, some members proposed that a sample survey should be conducted to gauge the opinions of members of the public on the Basic Law (Draft) or on some of the sections and chapters of the Draft such as that on the political structure. Members held divergent views on this proposal. Some of them expressed support while others were against the proposal or had reservations about it. Moreover, the members did not have any clear idea or common understanding of the objectives and methods of the sample survey.
4.2 On 18 February, at the resumed meeting of the 21th meeting of the Executive Committee, the Vice Chairmen each reported on the results of discussions held by the special groups, including the opinions of members for and against the proposal that the CCBL should conduct a sample survey. As the opinions of members were not unanimous, the meeting asked the Secretariat to submit a report to the Executive Committee on the feasibility of conducting a sample survey scientifically, objectively and fairly.
4.3 On 8 March, the Executive Committee held the second resumed meeting of the 24th meeting at which members exchanged opinions on whether the CCBL would conduct a sample survey but no conclusion was reached.
4.4 On 29 March, the Executive Committee held the third resumed meeting of the 24th meeting. The meeting first studied the report on the question of sample survey submitted by the Secretariat and then further discussed the issue. The issue was put to a vote after discussion, with the following results: 2 votes for, 5 against and 3 abstentions. It was finally resolved that the CCBL would not conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft). The meeting also decided to follow last year's practice, i.e. to faithfully convey to the Drafting Committee the survey results submitted by outside parties and organizations.
4.5 After this decision was publicly announced, three members of the CCBL wrote to the Executive Committee individually, demanding that the issue should be discussed again at the general meeting.
4.6 On 22 April, the 25th meeting of the Executive Committee discussed the demand of the three CCBL members, and resolved that the issue would be referred to the seventh general meeting for discussion.
4.7 Later, in view of the events that took place on mainland China in May and June, the Executive Committee announced that the seventh general meeting which was initially scheduled for 3 June was to be postponed. The above- mentioned issue was thus denied a chance to be discussed at the general meeting. On 2 September, the 28th meeting of the Executive Committee was held. It was decided that the seventh general meeting was to be held on 23 September and that the item "To discuss whether the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft)" was to remain on the agenda.
4.8 On 23 September, at the seventh general meeting of the CCBL, members expressed their views on whether the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft). Since the Executive Committee did not receive any motion to vote on the issue within 7 days after the agenda for the general meeting was given, or before the meeting, the meeting could not pass a resolution on the issue.
4.9 On 7 October, the Executive Committee held the 30th meeting at which the issue of whether the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft) was again discussed. The voting results were: 3 votes in favour, 12 against (among which two were submitted in writing), and 2 abstentions. The meeting resolved that the CCBL would not conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft). However, other individuals or organizations were welcome to submit their poll results to the CCBL.
4.10 After the Executive Committee had made the above decision, four CCBL members resigned, one after another, from the CCBL as a gesture of dissatisfaction. They maintained that the CCBL's decision showed its indifference to public opinion and its failure to fully perform its consultative duties.
5. Controversial issues and views arising from the discussion of the Consultative Committee for the Basic Law
5.1 On the point of having a public opinion poll conducted by the CCBL
5.1.1 Affirmative views:
5.1.1.1 The CCBL has always played a passive role in collecting opinions from members of the public. It merely collects the opinions submitted by people in Hong Kong without discerning the degree of inclinations for various opinions existing within the community. Hence, a public opinion poll conducted by the CCBL will be highly valued as it will make up for this inadequacy and will increase the legitimacy of the Basic Law.
5.1.1.2 Under the prevailing circumstances, it will be difficult to reach a compromise. Moreover, the point of having a public opinion poll does not lie in seeking a compromise among the various models or opinions, but in understanding how people in Hong Kong generally think of the various opinions.
5.1.1.3 A public opinion poll will not exclude new opinions. Furthermore, it is expected that not many new opinions will be put forward towards or after the conclusion of the consultation period. If a public opinion poll is conducted then, no major problems will arise even if it fails to collect new opinions as this is not its function. The poll will enable people in Hong Kong to show their stance on the existing opinions and the results of the poll will be very helpful to the Drafting Committee in making its final decisions.
5.1.1.4 Inclinations which are substantive or established on a scientific basis will help the drafters in their consideration and decision-making. The CCBL should not be over-anxious about "the undesirable influence that quantified opinions may have on the drafters" as the drafters are persons of insight who will make wise decisions against pressure.
5.1.1.5 Some of the drafters have affirmed the positive role of a public opinion poll.
5.1.1.6 The CCBL has relatively more resources than other organizations and is therefore qualified to conduct a territory-wide public opinion poll.
5.1.1.7 The CCBL is relatively neutral and has sufficient authority to conduct a territory-wide public opinion poll. Hence, a public opinion poll conducted by the CCBL should be more reliable than one conducted by any other organization and will be readily accepted by the public.
5.1.2 Reservations and objections:
5.1.2.1 The function of the CCBL is to extensively collect the opinions of people from various sectors on the Basic Law. The methods it adopts for collecting opinions from members of the public are not altogether passive. In the past few years, the CCBL organized activities such as public-hearings, meet-the-public sessions, to actively collect the opinions of people in Hong Kong.
5.1.2.2 The CCBL members themselves are quite representative in consulting people from different social strata. One cannot say that it is impossible to assess the opinions of people in Hong Kong without conducting a public opinion poll.
5.1.2.3 Some of the drafters indicated that they did take some of the opinion polls as reference when formulating the political model but their effort received much criticism. The CCBL may also have to shoulder such a burden in future.
5.1.2.4 The neutrality of the CCBL has always been questioned. Hence, a survey conducted by a marketing research company commissioned by the CCBL will be criticized regardless of the survey results.
5.1.2.5 Whatever the opinion poll results obtained by the CCBL are, if the Drafting Committee does not take specific actions accordingly, the CCBL will be regarded as a consultative organization not taken seriously by the Drafting Committee. This will exert pressure on both the CCBL and the Drafting Committee.
5.1.2.6 A public opinion poll conducted by the CCBL only means that the CCBL will commission a marketing research company to conduct the opinion poll. The CCBL itself is unlikely to or should not get involved in the actual survey. Hence, the role played by the CCBL in a public opinion poll is not different from that played by any other organization or body.
5.1.2.7 The aim of having an opinion poll conducted by the CCBL is not clear. There are many different proposals. Regarding the carrying out of a public opinion poll by the CCBL, different parties put forward different views on different occasions and at different times: some are of the opinion that a survey on the controversial issues relating to the political structure alone would suffice; some are in favour of conducting a comprehensive survey on every part of the Basic Law (Draft); and some propose that the survey should be on the acceptability of the entire Draft to the public. If the CCBL resolves to conduct a sample survey, it will have to decide on the scope of the survey. Since the CCBL is composed of people of different political views and from various sectors, it will be very difficult to make this decision.
5.1.2.8 Sample survey has long been employed in the business world as a scientific, objective and fair method. As the questions to be surveyed in a commercial context are relatively simple and clear, the design of the questionnaire is a relatively easy job. If the survey is on political, social or current affairs issues, especially when there are divergent opinions on the existing issue of political structure, the presentation of the questions, the contents of the answers and the number of choices available will each be a possible source of further disputes among people of different political views. There are different opinions on the process and arrangements for the design of the questionnaire: 1. The Executive Committee will only give some objective instructions and the research company will be solely responsible for the design of the questionnaire; 2. An independent monitoring authority will be set up to monitor the process of the survey, but no definite proposal on the composition of this authority has been made yet. This indicates that people of different political views will try their best to influence and monitor the process of the survey to ensure that the results of the survey will be favourable to their own camp. Since the CCBL is an organization comprising people of various political views, it is difficult to guarantee that the survey will be free from any political influence and conducted objectively and fairly. In fact, regarding the presentation of some political questions, it is quite impossible to find a standard that is objective, unbiased and acceptable to all. In this respect, lessons can be drawn from the experience of the Hong Kong Government in its public opinion poll conducted in 1987 on the reform of the political structure in Hong Kong.
5.1.2.9 The CCBL has not denied the function of public opinion polls as a means of collecting opinions from the public, or their scientific nature. But it must be pointed out that a public opinion poll will not bring in new opinions. It may appear that a public opinion poll will not exclude new opinions, but in fact it will, since only several major opinions will be selected from existing opinions for the survey. And it is on this basis that the inclinations of the public towards these opinions are quantified. During this process, we first have to selectively choose a number of opinions from the many because the number of opinions regarding a certain issue, e.g. the political models, may be too large. It will be impossible to list out each and every one of them. Only a few of them can be selected to be surveyed. Even if all the models could be presented in the questionnaire, any new opinions put forward after the questionnaire has been designed would not be processed. For instance, if the CCBL decided early this year to conduct a public opinion poll in June or July, the models released after July, such as the "one-council, two-chamber" and "4-4-2" models, would naturally be excluded from the questionnaire. Thus, it will be unfair to those new opinions which emerge after the questionnaire has been designed.
5.1.2.10 For the reason mentioned in 5.1.1.2, if the CCBL was to conduct such a survey, it would be unfavourable to the seeking of a compromise model among the various camps.
5.1.2.11 The so-called "public opinion poll" in fact refers to a sample survey and not a referendum. It is to select a certain number of sample units from the adult population in Hong Kong to answer the questionnaire. The argument that a public opinion poll will enhance the participation of the public is unfounded since not every member of the public will be asked to respond. Only a limited number of people will be selected to answer the questionnaire. Such a process will not enable more members of the public to actually take part in the consultation exercise. Neither will it enhance the participation of the public in the consultation on the Basic Law, nor increase the legitimacy of the Basic Law.
5.2 On whether a public opinion poll is in line with the CCBL's Constitution
5.2.1 Affirmative views:
5.2.1.1 In the last consultation report. the number of opinions collected from various sources (e.g. the number of people supporting a certain signature campaign) were listed out. As this practice has not violated the CCBL's Constitution, neither will a public opinion poll.
5.2.1.2 A public opinion poll exactly observes the principle laid down in the CCBL's Constitution: "seeking common ground while reserving differences, [and] not insisting on unanimity".
5.2.2 Reservations and objections:
5.2.2.1 To find out the inclinations of members of the public towards certain opinions is against the provision that the CCBL "shall study in depth views and suggestions on the contents of the Basic Law, ..., nor deciding matters by voting" prescribed in the CCBL's Constitution. In the past few years, the CCBL has strictly observed this principle by not quantifying the opinions submitted by its members or by outside parties in order to conduct democratic consultations by seeking common ground while reserving differences and not insisting on unanimity. Nevertheless, the decision on whether or not to conduct a public opinion poll is a procedural issue which can be put to a vote. But the sole function of a public opinion poll is to quantify opinions, which is against the Constitution of the CCBL.
5.2.2.2 In the last consultation report, the supporting and opposing views of the public on various issues were not quantified. Only the number of opinions collected from different sources was listed out. These figures are not necessarily related to the inclinations of members of the public regarding a certain opinion. In fact, in the last round of consultations, it was impossible for us to accurately compute the number of view in favour of or against a certain opinion.
5.3 On the scientific nature of a public opinion poll
5.3.1 Affirmative views:
5.3.1.1 Undeniably, all means of collecting opinions (including public opinion polls) have their limitations and are subject to a certain rate of error. So long as the whole process is conducted rigorously at an acceptable rate of error, the survey results are generally accepted.
5.3.1.2 When no better alternatives are available, a public opinion poll is the most scientific, fair and effective method for collecting opinions from the general public. To query the scientific nature of public opinion polls by arguing that the survey results obtained from a sample of several hundred to three thousand people cannot represent the opinions of people in Hong Kong at large, is undoubtedly being sceptical about modern science.
5.3.1.3 Although a public opinion poll has its limitations, the CCBL can at least find out through the survey the inclinations of people in Hong Kong at a certain period of time. If one worries that a single survey may fail to indicate clearly the opinions of people in Hong Kong, a second survey may be conducted.
5.3.1.4 If one flatly refuses to conduct a public opinion poll on the grounds that it is not reliable, it will be difficult for him to account for this decision in the future. The CCBL should not expect to obtain all consultation results from one single public opinion poll as it will be an unfair demand. Indeed, it is difficult to find a scientific method which will guarantee accurate results. But the CCBL should at least indirectly encourage other parties to conduct public surveys and summarize the survey results for the consideration of the CCBL.
5.3.2 Reservations and objections: 5.3.2.1 Provided the sample size is large enough, the adoption of a scientific marketing reserach method for gauging the opinions of members of the public may be considered. However, the larger the sample, the higher the costs.
5.3.2.2 The scientific nature of public opinion polls should not be queried. However, if the poll is not comprehensive enough, it will become even more unscientific because inadequate representation will be highly misleading. It may even undo all the work the CCBL has done.
5.3.2.3 Public opinion polls are scientific in some ways, but they also have their unscientific aspects. For instance, individual persons have different interpretations and standards of democracy. If such interpretations and standards of democracy are summed up through a public opinion poll, the results could be very misleading. In fact, there have been public opinion polls which produced contradictory results.
5.3.2.4 Public opinion polls are undoubtedly a scientific method, provided that representative opinions on the matters being surveyed can be obtained through this kind of surveys. The Basic Law (Draft) is a very complicated legal instrument. It is reported that less than one per cent of the population in Hong Kong have read the Draft. Hence, it is impossible to request people in Hong Kong to express their opinions on the Basic Law systematically.
5.3.2.5 The CCBL has not altogether denied the function of public opinion polls. Its main consideration is whether it is appropriate to have a opinion poll conducted by itself. Members of the public as well as other organizations may conduct opinion polls individually. And the CCBL will convey faithfully those results it receives to the Drafting Committee.
5.3.2.6 The results of a sample survey are valid only for a limited period of time because the inclinations of the public on certain issues are subject to the influence of many factors. The accuracy of the survey results very often depends on the respondents' understanding of the issue itself and of the questions asked in the survey at that time. Their opinions are at the same time influenced by the public opinion and the happenings around them. The attitude of the public towards certain issues may change tremendously within a certain period. Thus, many marketing researches are conducted regularly, for example, twice to four times a year. If the inclinations of the public concerning certain Basic Law-related matters are gauged by a single survey, the quantified opinions will probably become outdated after a few months.
5.3.2.7 It is doubted whether a political organization like the CCBL will be able to execute this scientific process free from interference and objectively, especially in the design of the questionnaire. The various political forces will make sure that they have a chance to participate and exert influence so that the survey results will be favourable to their own camp.
5.3.2.8 Subject to the nature of the CCBL, whether the survey results will be accepted by all parties, including the party to which the results are unfavourable, remains a big question.
5.4 On the handling of the results of a public opinion poll
5.4.1 Affirmative view:
5.4.1.1 The cause of the request for a public opinion poll is that no one is in a position to represent the people in Hong Kong in accepting or rejecting the provisions of the Basic Law (Draft), especially those under the chapter on the political structure and in the annexes. Thus, a public opinion poll is just right for gauging the acceptability of the Basic Law to the public. The Drafting Committee should then abide by the wishes of the people and amend the provisions according to the acceptability of the provisions to the public.
5.4.2 Reservations and objections:
5.4.2.1 It is indicated in some opinions that if the survey results are binding on the Drafting Committee, the Drafting Committee will have to amend the Draft according to these results. However, the survey results do not necessarily suggest exactly how the Draft should be amended. The results may even confuse the Drafting Committee as they are contradictory or no clear inclination is shown by the answers in the questionnaire. Since the majority of survey results are in the form of simple answers, rarely with detailed explanations, if the Drafting Committee is to amend the Draft in accordance with such results, it will have a difficult job justifying itself to members of the CCBL and people from various sectors who have been involved in in-depth discussions on the Draft in the past three years or so. On the other hand, if the survey results are not binding on the Drafting Committee, the Drafting Committee will not amend the Draft in accordance with these results, and the public opinion poll will become a futile effort.
5.4.2.2 If other organizations and bodies within the community also conduct their own public opinion polls at the same time, the results of their surveys may be contradictory to those obtained by the CCBL. Then, the Drafting Committee will be at loss as to which set of results to follow.
5.4.2.3 The public opinion poll has now become a political issue and will not be able to fulfil its expected function, i.e. to gauge the inclinations of the public scientifically, objectively and fairly. It has been used by certain parties as a tool for propagating certain political viewpoints and stirring up public opinion. It has also become a means and an excuse for political campaigns. It has been politicized in all aspects from whether to conduct the poll, to the way of doing it, to the interpretation of its results. Thus, the conditions under which it can be conducted objectively and scientifically no longer exist. All political forces will join in the planning, execution and monitoring of the survey to influence the results to their own advantage. Under such circumstances, the results of the poll, whatever they are, will not be accepted by those in opposition. This situation will not be helpful to resolving the problem.
5.5 On the conditions and methods for conducting a public opinion poll
5.5.1 Affirmative views:
5.5.1.1 After the Beijing incident, the political consciousness of the Hong Kong public has been raised tremendously. The effect of this incident is even greater than that of ten years' civic education. Hence, there are favourable conditions for conducting a public opinion poll.
5.5.1.2 There are many opinions which cannot be quantified. However, if the various models are presented for the public to choose from, the opinions can be quantified. A viable method is to translate the issues to be surveyed into simple answers, e.g. "yes" or "no", for the public to choose from. Such a survey is believed to be meaningful and efficient.
5.5.1.3 According to information, there is still a large balance in the Fund for the disposal of the CCBL. The expenses incurred by a public opinion poll will therefore not be a problem.
5.5.1.4 It has been suggested that a public opinion poll should be conducted after the conclusion of the consultation period and before the Drafting Committee subgroup meetings. It will be a finale to the consultation after members of the public have fully expressed their views.
5.5.1.5 The scope of the survey can be greatly reduced to focus only on those issues which we consider to be most in need of a survey, such as that on the political models. This will make the design of the questionnaire less complex. To ensure the fairness of the questionnaire, a research company may be commissioned to design the questionnaire. A broadly representative research group may even be formed to monitor the design of the questionnaire.
5.5.2 Reservations and objections:
5.5.2.1 After the Beijing incident, reservations have been expressed about having a public opinion poll because any emotional element injected into the survey will bias the results. The Basic Law is drafted for the next 50 years and momentary feelings should not be allowed to jeopardize future long-term development.
5.5.2.2 As the general public lack in-depth understanding of the Basic Law, the results of a public opinion poll may be biased.
5.5.2.3 It is not advisable to limit the scope of the survey to the part on the political structure and neglect the other sections and chapters. The existing political models all have their strong points and weaknesses. The best alternative will be to have the Drafting Committee sum up the strong points of each model to form the best model. It will not be appropriate to decide on the political model through a public opinion poll.
5.5.2.4 Many issues covered by the Basic Law are interrelated and should not be considered independently. To separate them or simplify them may not be desirable and is actually difficult. For example, if these issues are each dealt with separately and translated into simple questions with "yes or no" answers, but are later grouped together again, a complicated case will be created.
5.5.2.5 The format and design of a questionnaire will have direct bearing on the survey results. Thus, there is bound to be a heated public debate before the actual survey. However, the end results may still not be accepted by everyone. A number of public opinion poll reports have been criticized for being inconsistent with the facts.
5.5.2.6 The Basic Law is a complicated constitutional instrument with numerous articles, sections and chapters. Its contents are lengthy, with the articles, sections and chapters all interrelated with one another. It is therefore very difficult to design a questionnaire which is clear and unbiased. If the CCBL is to conduct the opinion poll itself, the technical standard and fairness of the design of the questionnaire will be queried. Even if the CCBL is to commission a research company to conduct the opinion poll, it is likely that the company will be accused of being manipulated by the CCBL. Thus, the fairness, scientific nature and objectivity of the public opinion poll will also be queried.
5.5.2.7 The current financial position of the CCBL is different from that a few months ago. It is indicated in the CCBL's financial report: "As a result of the 'June 4 incident', the CCBL has to make adjustments to its original work plan. For instance, the extension of the consultation period will result in a corresponding increase in expenditure, and the publicity promos and posters already produced all need to be replaced by new ones. Hence, the budget for the relevant expense items also needs to be adjusted accordingly." It is also stated in that report: "If estimated according to the current financial position and income and expenditure level of the CCBL,..., the remaining balance of the Fund should just be enough for the CCBL to operate until its dissolution."
6. Conclusion
On whether or not the CCBL should conduct a public opinion poll on the Basic Law (Draft), there are many contradictory views among members of the public and CCBL members. After thorough discussions on the issue, the CCBL finally decided to adopt last year's practice i.e. not to conduct a public opinion poll to gauge the opinions of the general public. This decision does not mean that the CCBL has denied the role of public opinion polls. It only indicates that it is not appropriate for the CCBL to conduct a public opinion poll as a means of consulting the public on the Basic Law. As regards those public opinion polls conducted on the Basic Law by individuals outside the CCBL or by other organizations, the CCBL will pass the results of the polls on to the Drafting Committee for reference without giving any comment or explanation.
* If there is any discrepancy between the Chinese and the English versions, the Chinese version shall prevail.