CONFIDENTIAL
1451
MDLIAN 072
UNKNOWN.
PERFORMANCE IN THE ELECTION
THE TABLE BELOW SHOWS THE PERFORMANCE OF THE MAJOR POLITICAL
3.
GROUPS:
GROUP
CANDIDATES
ELECTED
SUCCESS RATE
UDHK
80
57
70 PER CENT
ADPL
19
14
74 PER CENT
85
MP
13
11
85 PER CENT
HKDF
7
3
43 PER CENT
LOF
89
62
(only 35 "Specified
50
56 PER CENT
FTU
16
12
75 PER CENT
(ADPL STANDS FOR THE ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRACY AND PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOOD, MP FOR MEETING POINT, AND HKDF FOR THE HONG KONG DEMOCRATIC FOUNDATION.)
4 =
THE FIGURES IN THE TABLE MUST BE USED WITH CAUTION BECAUSE THE CANDIDATES SUPPORTED BY A GROUP SOMETIMES INCLUDE QUOTE FRIENDLY UNQUOTE CANDIDATES WHO ACTUALLY RAN UNDER THE BANNER OF ANOTHER GROUP. IT IS ALSO DIFFICULT TO VERIFY INDEPENDENTLY THE FIGURES MAINLY BECAUSE THE IDENTITY OF THE CANDIDATES OF THE LDF
AND PRO-CHINA GROUPS WAS OFTEN UNKNOWN.
5. NOT SURPRISINGLY, EVERY GROUP CLAIMED SUCCESS IN THIS ELECTION. UDHK DID WELL IN THE DISTRICTS OF KWAI TSING, TUEN MUN, EASTERN, TSUEN WAN AND SHAM SHUI PO AND GAINED VALUABLE FOOTHOLDS IN THE TRADITIONALLY CONSERVATIVE DISTRICTS OF WAN CHAI AND SOUTHERN. THEY WERE LESS SUCCESSFUL, HOWEVER, IN SHA TIN AND CENTRAL/WESTERN, WHERE ONLY ABOUT HALF OF THEIR CANDIDATES WON. THEIR ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH THEMSELVES IN TAI PO ALSO FAILED WHEN
BOTH OF THEIR CANDIDATES WERE DEFEATED.
6.
ADPL WON ALL NINE OF THE SEATS THEY CONTESTED IN THEIR HOME BASE OF SHAM SHUI PO. ITS PERFORMANCE OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT WAS
FAR LESS SPECTACULAR. IT DID NEVERTHELESS GAIN ONE SEAT IN SAI
2
PAGE
CONFIDENTIAL