Political reform package is the best available option for Hong Kong

When certain officials suggested that Hong Kong's citizens should "pocket it first" when considering the government's political reform package, there was an immediate public uproar.

Those opposed to the proposal, including several Legislative Council members and politicians, leapt in to criticise the package as a "knock-off", "substandard", "less than satisfactory" and an "interim proposal".

They claimed that candidates who emerged as a result would be "rotten oranges", and told citizens not to "pocket it first" or they would be stuck with it forever.

At the same time, the supporting parties have trapped themselves in a position of trying to sell a package that even they themselves consider to be "not ideal". All who have stepped forward to defend it have been unable to plausibly explain this reform package to the public in a convincing manner and have been sheepish in their justification.

This lack of justification and confidence from the government makes it hard for the reform package to gain the trust and acceptance of the people, let alone that of the opposition. When the proponents themselves do not believe that this is a proposal for "true universal suffrage" that is in line with Hong Kong's actual circumstances, how can they expect it to be accepted by the public?

In fact, asking people to "pocket it first" is to buy into the opponents' erroneous assumption that it is possible to have an "ultimate proposal" that cannot be altered in future - this assumption runs counter to the reality of a changing world. Any proposal that is being offered can only be the best available.

The government's political reform package is one such proposal - the best adapted to Hong Kong's actual circumstances, and the best suited to the interests and welfare of the majority of Hongkongers as well as the rest of the country's nearly 1.4 billion people. It is the most ideal proposal for true universal suffrage.