Filibustering by ringing the “voting bell” has become a common occurrence in the city’s legislature, and has been a useful tool for the pro-democracy side for stalling progress on legislation.
Some lawmakers have had enough of these shenanigans, but in a debate today an unlikely defence was offered for maintaining the bell’s five minute ring time: toilet breaks.
The issue heated up last month, when 38 pro-Beijing lawmakers suggested changes to the legislature’s rules of procedure in an attempt to curb the pro-democracy camp’s use of filibustering and their power to form select committees. This came after the government’s successful bid to disqualify six pro-democracy lawmakers, which leaves the pro-democracy camp outnumbered.
One of the proposed rule changes included reducing the amount of time the “voting bell” should be rung. This bell is used to call lawmakers back into the chamber to cast their vote, and usually lasts 5 minutes. The pro-Beijing camp has suggested reducing it to just 1 minute.
Naturally, many on the pro-democracy side blasted the move, including People Power lawmaker Ray Chan saying 5 minutes is enough time for lawmakers to think about what they are voting on.
However, the most interesting argument against reducing the voting bell time came from Civic Party’s Dr Kwok Ka-ki.
A urologist by training, Kwok told the chamber that he noticed a lot of his colleagues will use the toilet on the way to the chamber before they vote. He said was concerned about the health of his colleagues, and explained how reducing the voting bell time could be harmful.
“The average person needs 40 seconds to use the toilet, that does not include the time it takes to walk to the door, Mr President. We only have four doors to this chamber. After you push those four doors you need to find your seat.”
“We have plenty of toilets here in the Legislative Council. But our lawmakers are getting older and the time they need for the toilet is a bit longer,” he says, prompting laughter from his pro-democracy colleagues the chamber.
“We have some lawmakers who are about 50, 60, 70-years-old,” he says. “They need more time to pee”.
Kwok also argued that reducing the voting bell time from 5 minutes to 1 minute is also a question of safety, saying that lawmakers have to run from one side of the building to the LegCo chamber, then they are very likely to injure themselves getting to the chamber.
Unfortunately for the pro-democracy side, Kwok’s passionate defense was not enough to save them as the motion to cut short the voting bell was passed.
Reader Interactions