This was followed on Monday by another disturbing development. This time a motion was passed which effectively bans further discussion in the current Legco session of whether the chief executive should be directly elected in 2007. Again, it broke new ground. The motion was passed by pro-government legislators, including those of the Liberal Party and Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong, in order to prevent what, no doubt, they regard as premature discussion of Hong Kong's possible democratic reforms. The government is not intending to consult the public on this issue until next year at the earliest.

In both cases, questions arise as to whether the gagging motions breach Legco's rules of procedure. It may well be that the president of the legislature, Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, will ultimately be called upon to decide. But the more important question concerns the credibility and, indeed, the future of our Legislative Council. It has at times, with some justification, been dismissed as a mere talking-shop.

Now, certain legislators seem to want to curb the extent to which they can even talk. The gagging motions come at a particularly sensitive time. The national security legislation, required by Article 23 of the Basic Law, will probably be passed next month, bringing with it concerns that Hong Kong's freedoms will be eroded. By seeking to stifle debate in the Legislative Council chamber itself, the lawmakers concerned risk sending out the message that the so-called 'chilling effect' of the laws is making its mark. Both motions were passed when only a small number of legislators were present. But their impact is just as keenly felt.

Our lawmakers have a responsibility to ensure that issues of such fundamental importance to Hong Kong are properly and fairly debated. While there is a need for proceedings to be allowed to progress without undue delay, there should also be sufficient flexibility to enable all valid questions to be asked, and a wide range of views, including those of the minority, to be expressed.

It is sad that one of these motions aimed to curb debate of Hong Kong's possible democratic reforms. Events at Legco in recent days surely underline the need for such a debate to begin.

For updates, read the main section of the South China Morning Post.

Discussion points

- Should the government intervene in the

- If you were a legislator, would you be prepared to vote in the second reading of the Article 23 legislation on July 9, as it is now scheduled?

- Do you think the whole procedure is too rushed? What else do you need to make a decision?

Vocabulary

to be part and parcel of (something) (idiom)

to be part of something. The idiom comes from old legal language. It should only be used for serious emphasis.

unaccustomed (adj)

unfamiliar with. In the article, the double negative is used - 'not unaccustomed'. The technique is applied to emphasise the fact that legislators are used to political tactics

to rush through (phrasal v)

here it means to pass a law as quickly as possible

to break new ground (idiom)

to do something completely new

gagging (n)

a censoring of free speech. In British parliamentary procedures, it is another word for 'closure' - closing the discussion

to call upon (someone) to do (something) (phrasal v)

to formally ask someone to do something

talking-shop (n)

a conference or discussion at which nothing is going to be achieved. It is used to show disapproval