Hongkongers' opinions vary greatly on what the chief executive told Beijing on Tuesday in a widely-criticised report regarding the city's mainstream opinion on electoral reform.
The report is the first in a five-step process to achieve universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017.
It concluded that "mainstream opinion" in Hong Kong is that only a nominating committee should have the power to put forward chief executive candidates, and that such power must not be "undermined or bypassed". According to the paper, the public agreed that the election should be bound by the Basic Law and the decision made by Beijing's core legislative body.
Janet Choi Ho-ching, a 17-year-old student at HKU Space Po Leung Kuk Community College, doubts the paper truly represents society's mainstream opinion, and that Leung only revealed what the central government wanted to hear.
"The chief executive should act as a communication channel between Hong Kong people and the central government," she said. "But the report only made vague references to the repeated demand of Hong Kong people for universal suffrage and civic nomination during the July 1 and Occupy Central's unofficial referendum."
West Island School student Sonali Gidwani and King George V School student Wincy Leung, both 17, think that censoring public opinion could bring about harsher consequences for the government. However, Joy Pamnani, 15, who goes to PLK Ngan Po Ling College, thinks that the unofficial referendum shouldn't be included in the report.
South Island School student Anirudh Kannan agrees that the chief executive should "attend to matters of the country and have Hong Kong's best interests at heart".
Sha Tin College student Jack Sun, 17, thinks the requirement of having a chief executive who loves the country and Hong Kong is "far too subjective and cannot be properly assessed".