“Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong,” and “Hong Kong people speaking in vain,” sound the same in Cantonese. The people of Hong Kong who lost the confidence that the Communist Party promises, “Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong” are suggesting that “the people of Hong Kong [were] speaking in vain” as early as 20 years ago. At that time the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) tried to appease everyone and deceived the Hong Kong people by saying that after the CCP took back Hong Kong only two modifications would be made. The first was the changing of the Chief Executive and the second was the flag. Hong Kong's reunification was "the return of democracy." Current officials of the Hong Kong Democratic Party were members of "the Democracy Return Party" at that time. They were all confident that the return would greatly enhance democratic political opportunity. However, some people simply did not believe the CCP’s promise, thus the saying, “Hong Kong people speaking in vain.”

Currently every CCP fraud is being revealed, one by one. Recently it [the Party] "explained" the basic law and blatantly denied Hong Kong its general election in 2007 and legislature election in 2008. It is overtly and scandalously interfering in Hong Kong's internal affairs. Originally, Beijing appointed a puppet in Hong Kong to establish the façade of, “Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong,” but Jiang Zemin didn’t make a wise choice in appointing Tung Chee-hwa as the Chief Executive. Tung failed to act well, even as a puppet, and forced Beijing to get directly involved in, "saving the nation from subjugation,” which has revealed the pretense of "rule of Hong Kong by the people of Hong Kong."

According to Tsang Hin-chi, Chinese National People’s Congress Standing Committee member and representative from Hong Kong, the report Tung submitted to the National People’s Congress (NPC) was written after consultation with Beijing. That was why the vote at the NPC was unanimous, but for one abstention. If the government were determined to keep faking the “Hong Kong People Rule Hong Kong” situation, they could have asked the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government to release the “explanation of the Basic Law,” and let the HKSAR government handle feedback from Hong Kong residents. However, Beijing has too little confidence in its puppet Tung, and assigned Vice Secretary-General of the People’s Congress Qiao Xiaoyang to “explain the Basic Law” in Hong Kong. Thus, Beijing has lifted the thin veil and faced the Hong Kong people directly. Since the decision is already made, further explanation is of little use. Yeung Sum, Chairman of the Democratic Party in Hong Kong, rose from his seat to protest immediately after the “explanation” was announced.

Hong Kong’s native language is Cantonese, which is the language used in schools and at social events among the Chinese. The Legislative Council also uses Cantonese. Those who want to follow in Beijing’s footsteps or make money in the Mainland are busy studying Mandarin. However, Beijing refuses to communicate with pro-democracy politicians. As a result, these politicians are less eager to learn Mandarin, and their Mandarin is not good. Yeung’s protest speech was also in Cantonese. The translator didn’t dare translate the content to Qiao, so even when Democratic Party representatives were leaving en masse, Qiao didn’t know what was going on. The Democratic Party’s protests have become a perfect example of “Hong Kong people speaking in vain.”

Tsang Hin-chi said that opposition to the 2007 and 2008 elections doesn’t reflect Hong Kong's mainstream opinion. This is true because no matter what Hong Kong people say, Beijing can turn a deaf ear. How can this be the “mainstream?" Hong Kong people had only to vote to express their true opinion; however, Beijing issued an order not to allow elections in 2007 and 2008. The people can elect only 30 officials, which is half of the seats in the Legislative Council. Democratic Party representatives who are elected by the people will most likely always be less than half of the Council, thus they can never represent "the mainstream" and the situation will remain, “Hong Kong people speaking in vain.”