MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN

Some Reasons for "Thinking about 2007"

This is the first HKDF Newsletter that runs to 16 pages. It covers a wide range of issues with a common thread: the need for fundamental reform in Hong Kong.

Mr. Steve Vines puts forward a grim view of Hong Kong as China’s new colony. Dr. William Overholt and Dr. Christopher Westland also look at Hong Kong’s shortcomings from an international perspective. Mr. Chong Chan-yau gives a passionate plea to tackle poverty and disparity in income. Dr. Lam Pun-lee examines the alternative policies Hong Kong could adopt in regulating its public utilities and Mr. Alan Leong tells us how the SAR Government stubbornly refuses to listen to rational reasons for a better way to do things.

"China’s new colony"
I could sympathize Mr. Steve Vines moment of realisation of the "handover" when he saw workmen hoisting the Chinese state emblem to replace the royal coat of arms at the Central Government office on 1 July 1997¹ but the majority of locals probably welcomed the "reunification".

I wished that the five-star flag had represented a less authoritarian regime. But must we also accept a passive view that the Chinese Government is a tyrannical, oppressive regime that it is totally incapable of changing?

China is capable of changing for the better rapidly. And the Central Government is eager to see Hong Kong do well.

The question is, how we do channel the different and often opposing forces to a common cause? Will we come to a consensus? Will we find the necessary leadership and the political skills that enable us to do better than under British rule?

Something is not working
Something is not right with our post-1997 system of governance. Hong Kong has just installed a regime that does not seem as skilled as the colonial administrators in channelling the energy and disparate views of the people, plunging many into passive despair or a ‘penchant for protest’.

Members of the current administration who served under the colonial administration will vehemently deny that this slip has anything to do with the departure of the British, claiming that the Hong Kong Government had become independent of Whitehall long before 1997. Yet, the political vacuum created by a Chief Executive who prefers to defer and a Central Government who has indirectly appointed him is obvious. While Mr. C. H. Tung has the power to act but took the role of a filial son, the Central Government want to make sure that: "If we goof-up, it will be our own fault!"

A common thread
Even David Ackers-Jones and the conservative BPF (Business and Professional Federation)² have put forward a proposal for turning the Executive Council into a policy-making cabinet-style body.

As a Chinese national, I do believe that President Jiang Zemin and other national leaders wish us to do better than we did under colonial rule. To get there, the HKDF believes that Hong Kong needs to come to a cool-headed consensus on our system of governance, particularly the post-2007 system which the Basic Law leaves open.

Our defective governance system is the common thread through the many ideas expressed by our speakers. Hong Kong’s democratic aspirations clash with the views of many conservative businessmen. Trying to create a system that works for Hong Kong is the main reason behind organising "Thinking about 2007", a series of discussions on Hong Kong’s future system of governance.

When Lee Kuan Yew says jump, ask how high
Those of us in Hong Kong who write Lee Kuan Yew off as a narrow-minded oppressor may not be aware of his political skills and the adversities Singapore faced when he came to power on the coattails of the Malayan Communist Party, but the majority of Singapore citizens know that Mr. Lee’s vision and political skills have been instrumental in Singapore’s achievements.

Lee Kuan Yew has remained unrepentant about his high-handed tactics against opposition and the critical international media. And a draconian Internal Security Act which is worse than Hong Kong’s Public Order Ordinance still exists in Singapore.

But Lee Kuan Yew is not a fool and his view that Hong Kong’s democratic aspirations must not threaten China’s sovereignty is well worth listening to³. The HKDF is not suggesting that we should do as we’re told, but we should take Mr. Lee’s cue and ask why the drive for a better system of governance in Hong Kong and wishes of the Chinese Government must become opposing forces.

From the "Thinking about 2007 Workshop"⁴, we will produce a Green Paper which will identify key constitutional reform issues. We have listened to ideas put forward by leading academics from around the world and we are aware of the consequences that would result from different courses of action.

What Hong Kong needs is a broad discussion and a consensus on how to make things work in future. The big question is how to forge democracy, a better system of governance, economic and social development and the broader interests of China into converging forces.

Alan LUNG Ka-lun
Chairman

1 Hong Kong: China’s New Colony, by Steve Vines

2 The Executive Authorities of the HKSAR, published by the BPF on 1 November 2000

3 Text of Lee Kuan Yew’s speech at CUHK, Ming Pao, 8 December 2000

4 "Thinking about 2007" Workshop, organised by the HKDF on 21 October 2000