LegCo bill rejection fails to represent public opinion on same-sex marriage

On September 10, the Legislative Council (LegCo) overwhelmingly rejected the government’s bill to establish a registration system for same-sex couples who married overseas. The bill stemmed from the Court of Final Appeal’s 2023 ruling that obliged the government to implement such a system within two years.

What should we make of our now opposition-free LegCo’s unprecedented veto of a government proposal?

This episode brings into sharp relief the unrepresentative nature of our patriots-only legislature. When the local and central authorities set up this LegCo in 2021, they claimed it would be representative—presumably of the community. They pointed to a diversity of occupations, life experiences (from Hong Kong, mainland China, and Taiwan), and work backgrounds of legislators, including both political veterans and novices. Therefore, Beijing authorities argued that LegCo represents public opinion comprehensively.

After the bill vote, the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office (HKMAO) stated that the legislature reflected mainstream public opinion. It cited the results of LegCo’s own short public consultation exercise, in which 80 percent of over 10,700 submissions opposed the proposal—a clear and direct reflection of public sentiment. The HKMAO emphasized this as allegedly real public opinion, rather than appealing to some vague notion of what public opinion ought to be on this issue.

However, how real is this claim?

First, consider Hong Kong’s experience with official public consultation exercises, which are now largely discredited. In these exercises, the government mostly seeks to promote a policy to the public and persuade citizens that the policy is appropriate and should be implemented. Critics highlight many problems with these exercises, such as short consultation periods, insufficient publicity on the issue, and a lack of transparency on how the results are communicated back to the public.

In this case, the Hong Kong government undertook no public consultation. Instead of trying to convince the public to adopt the policy, LegCo itself consulted the public to oppose a government policy. The submissions reveal more about the mobilization capacity of anti-LGBTQ proponents than about genuine public opinion—because these groups were more interested in defeating the proposal than in fostering authentic dialogue.

Second, scientifically conducted survey data are available on this issue. A 2023 survey revealed that only 17 percent of the public opposed same-sex marriage in Hong Kong—not the 80 percent opposition reflected in the submissions to LegCo. The survey also showed that 60 percent of respondents were… [content ends].
https://hongkongfp.com/2025/09/21/legco-bill-rejection-fails-to-represent-public-opinion-on-same-sex-marriage/