Wang Guangya, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, has joined Li Fei, chairman of the Basic Law Committee of the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC), and Zhang Xiaoming, director of the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the HKSAR to meet Hong Kong deputies of the NPC, Hong Kong members of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and some Hong Kong lawmakers in Shenzhen on Thursday.

These central government officials head policy departments dealing with Hong Kong and Macao affairs. Their meeting with representatives from Hong Kong shows the importance the central government attaches to Hong Kong's constitutional reform. That they agreed to discussions with opposition lawmakers at a separate meeting shows their commitment to the democratic development of the SAR.

This is not the first time the central government has done this. But previous efforts achieved little because of the hard-line attitudes of certain opposition lawmakers. It's a shame moderate opposition lawmakers were too afraid to confront a few troublemakers. They have wasted many precious opportunities to sort out their differences with the central government.

Without the efforts of more than 1.5 million Hong Kong residents, who clearly expressed their views on the implementation of universal suffrage by signing the anti-"Occupy Central" petition to back constitutional reform, the meetings on Thursday would have likely stalled again.

The silent majority may well have reason to be relieved. But we know opposition politicians will not mend their ways that easily. Nevertheless the latest attempt to communicate is a welcome step forward.

Remember when Hong Kong was set to return to the embrace of the montherland? Many thought the central government would send a Chief Executive (CE) to head the SAR government and let locals handle the administrative work after the handover - just as the British government had done. This idea gave birth to a saying: "Nothing will change except the governor." Surprise! Beijing not only abandoned the idea of sending a CE here but promised to let Hong Kong residents elect their own CE by universal suffrage when the time was right.

Look at what we are dealing with now. The "pan-democrat" camp has been hijacked by a radical faction. It is acting contrary to the tenets of the Basic Law. It is threatening to hurt Hong Kong's economy and social stability by supporting the proposed "Occupy" campaign. Because of this there may be some who now wish the central government had not decided to go ahead with universal suffrage.

The decision to require approval by two-thirds of Legislative Council (LegCo) members before a constitutional reform plan can pass indicates Beijing also cares about the minority opinion. It respects the right of Hong Kong residents to express themselves. If the two-thirds majority stipulated in the Basic Law had been changed to a simple majority (more than half of LegCo members) none of the problems we have today would have emerged. But can a majority rule system work in Hong Kong? Many Western countries which have adopted majority rule believe the answer is "Yes". The US Congress, for example, requires a simple majority to pass legislation, which will become law after it is signed by the president. However should the legislature wish to overturn a presidential decision; a two-thirds majority is required. If the Basic Law is not convincing enough, what more proof do they need?

The "pan-democrats" have no reason to bet on a "critical minority" (four votes more than one-third) at this stage. It's time they realized that for many of them the chance of being re-elected to LegCo will disappear if they crush Hong Kong voters' hopes of electing the CE by universal suffrage in 2017.

They also refuse to abandon their demand for "public nomination". But do they really believe any opposition leaders will be nominated this way? If they cannot accept that more than 1.5 million Hongkongers oppose them and still cite the 780,000 votes received in their "referendum" they are ignoring the facts.

But not all opposition members are irrational. I don't understand why the rational ones willingly let the radical ones determine what they do. The few unruly politicians who thrive in street politics don't really want to be CE. They don't know anything about governance and they don't really care. If the rest of the "pan-democrats" are serious about their political ambitions, they should part company with the troublemakers. They should try to reach consensus with the central government. This is the only way forward. They must convince the majority of Hong Kong voters they are trustworthy and can be part of a SAR government.

The author is a veteran journalist based in Hong Kong.

(HK Edition 08/22/2014 page9)