An Open Letter to Carrie Lam: Protect LGBT citizens in Policy Address 2018
Dear Mrs. Lam:
At the Legislative Council last month, I asked you about the Government’s plan to tackle existing policies that discriminate against Hong Kong citizens identifying themselves as members of sexual minorities, and about the timetable for legislation to ban such discrimination in your upcoming Policy Address.
Instead of giving me any concrete plan, you said that the Government needs to consider broader social acceptance and different viewpoints. You would be happy to look at the evidence of a general consensus in society on the issue, you also said, if I can provide any.

Indeed, I am able to provide solid evidence that there is a strong and growing social consensus in Hong Kong on such legislation. As your answer implies, the Government has every responsibility and should make every effort to protect LGBT Hong Kong citizens through legislation. This answer is already a far cry from what you said in a private meeting with me five years ago. When asked when the Government would move the legislation forward in 2013, you, who were then Chief Secretary for Administration, told me that this piece of legislation is “not the Government’s first priority.”
In other words, legislating to protect LGBT citizens from discrimination will always be a back burner issue, and as such, the Government need not do anything because there will always be more pressing issues, such as housing, poverty, healthcare, education, that are assigned higher priorities than the human rights of LGBT Hong Kong citizens.
When it comes to human rights, the majority does not rule. The minorities are respected by the majority so that nobody will be treated as a second-class citizen.
Nevertheless, LGBT people in Hong Kong are still treated as second-class citizens, and there has been no progress made in the two-decade history of the Special Administrative Region, even when the United Nations Human Rights Commission has repeatedly urged the Hong Kong Government to legislate to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
The Government has every responsibility and should make every effort to protect LGBT Hong Kong citizens through legislation. In an Equal Opportunities Commission study released two years ago, over 55.6% of the Hong Kong public supports legislation to ban discrimination against people of different sexual orientations, gender identities, and intersex statuses. This figure has almost doubled when compared to a government study conducted in 2005, in which only 28.7% of the Hong Kong public supported legislation. In the 2016 study, a whopping 91.8% of respondents aged between 18 and 24 support legislation.
Based on these findings, the Equal Opportunities Commission urged the Government to hold public consultations so legislation can move ahead as people express their views on the matter. Two years have passed, but the Equal Opportunities Commission’s findings and proposal continue to fall on deaf ears.
This summer, the University of Hong Kong’s Centre for Comparative and Public Law published a survey, in which more than half of the survey respondents support same sex marriage — an increase of 12% compared with the results from a similar survey in 2014. Support for legislation stands at 69%. I hope you will agree with me that this is social consensus, pure and simple. Must we also win the hearts and minds of the most homophobic and close-minded people in Hong Kong as well?
If you still doubt these verifiable and scientific poll results from independent institutions, I suggest that your administration should conduct one of its own and hold public consultations. The major areas to be explored are the new law’s characteristics, definitions, the format of the law, different categories of contraventions, the scope of protection it affords, and exempted circumstances. No more time should be wasted to belabor the question whether Hong Kong needs a new law.
Mr. C.Y. Leung, the former Chief Executive said in his first Policy Address in 2013, “the Government understands that this is a highly controversial issue which must be tackled cautiously. We will continue to listen to different views from various sectors. At present, we have no plan to conduct consultation.” Unfortunately, one cannot govern by avoiding controversial issues like the plague, because almost everything can be deemed controversial in this day and age.
The Lam administration’s style of governance cannot be said to resemble that of the Leung administration, as you assured community members during your election campaign that you would not let your Catholic faith interfere with your policy position and that a public consultation is possible. However, you did not even make mention of the legislation in your last Policy Address.
Hong Kong is an international finance and business hub, and cannot afford to allow discrimination against people of different sexual orientations, gender identities, and intersex statuses. These conducts and behaviours harm members of the LGBT community, are bad for business, and hamper Hong Kong’s image and competitiveness in attracting and retaining talents. It is now time to outlaw this sort of discrimination for good.
When it comes to benefits for same-sex partners, I will move a debate at the Legislative Council next month to urge the Government to study the formulation of policies to allow same-sex couples to enter into civil unions. I hope the Government will proactively work with the Council on this occasion in order to find more common ground.
Responding to a question about reducing the number of one-way (immigrant) permits to Hong Kong, you said that family reunion is a basic human right. You retorted by persuading colleagues to have empathy and support the government’s role in allowing family union.
I find your stance on family reunion admirable. Would you similarly vouch for same-sex couples? Why did the Government spend the taxpayers’ money to appeal the QT vs. Director of Immigration case all the way to the Court of Final Appeal, in order to deny the said couple the right to family reunion?
What are the bases of a family? A man and a woman? Or love, caring for each other, stability, and responsibilities? In your eyes, do same-sex couples have rights to family, let alone family reunion?
A month ago, a good friend of mine left us. She asked why she couldn’t enjoy the same rights as opposite-sex couples, get married and live in Hong Kong together. She could not because she loved a woman.
Earlier, a byline article written by Stephen Vines caught my attention. I think his conclusion is food for thought for both sides of the debate. It reads, “change will eventually come in Hong Kong; the only question is how long it will take and how damaging the struggle for reform will be to the SAR’s reputation.” I look forward to working with your administration to do what is right for Hong Kong.
Sincerely,
Ray Chan
Member of the Legislative Council
Chairperson, People Power
[Raymond Chan is Hong Kong parliamentarian (2012 –) and Chairperson of People Power (2016 –). He is the first openly gay lawmaker in the Chinese-speaking world, reelected to public office with 45,993 votes. Follow him on Twitter @slowbeat_chan ]