Pragmatic But Forward Looking. Prudent But Caring. Broad Support For Policy Address From Participants Of Better Hong Kong Foundation Forum — But Forum Identifies Areas Which Need Greater Government Attention

The Better Hong Kong Foundation today submitted a paper to SAR Chief Executive, Tung Chee Hwa, outlining issues which need greater government attention if he can achieve a Hong Kong without chronic livelihood issues and a Hong Kong which can compete on a global basis in the 21st Century.

The paper is the culmination of a two hour Forum conducted immediately after the Policy Address was delivered. Participants in the forum included Dr. Leonard K. Cheng (1), Mr Andy Ho (2), Dr. Francis Lui (3), Dr. Richard Yue-chim Wong (4) and Mr Tsang Kam Yan (5). The forum was facilitated by Mr. George Yuen, Chief Executive of The Better Hong Kong Foundation.

“The feeling at the end of the Policy Address was positive and up beat. While the Chief Executive did not go into as much detail on some issues as we would have liked he demonstrated he is prepared to take action and tackle issues which concern all people in Hong Kong. This is a refreshing change” said Mr George Yuen. “However, this did not stop the participants in our Forum asking ‘What more can be done?’ and ‘Has he gone far enough?’. While we appreciate it is difficult to please all the people, all of the time we felt it appropriate that we share these views with the government.”

The participants of the forum broadly supported the measures taken to stabilise home prices. Professor Richard Wong said: “If all the measures are implemented and a large number of flats are built I think it will definitely be able to stabilise property prices in the long run. There might even be healthy adjustments.”

However, there were reservations as to whether or not all the measures could be implemented as planned. To counter this the Forum agreed government must increase the number of public housing flats to be offered for sale each year to match demand. It also urged government to make a more thorough study of the pilot scheme for tendering sites and ensuring 30% of the flats are handed to the government for sale. The reason for this is that it is a new scheme and could have serious implications for the fundamentals of Hong Kong’s economy.

The area of education offered overwhelming support from the panelists. There was broad agreement that the government had grasped the correct fundamentals and will be investing in the right areas, namely teacher training, information technology and civic education. One area of civic education they felt should be improved on was the area of anti-corruption messages to young people. Polls have suggested that young people’s tolerance of corruption has increased in the past five years and this is a worrying trend for the future if it is allowed to continue.

In the area of care for the elderly the panelists agreed money was not the only requirement and applauded the government for creating the Elderly Commission and the Carer’s Support and Resource Centres. Mr Tsang Kam Yan offered the following comments: “The proposals are conservative…but there are some fundamental changes. This shows a great deal of caution in not putting a heavy burden on society”.

Discussion on the proposed measures for the economy was animated. Professor Francis Lui explained: “(a large part of the HK$88 billion) will be spent on infrastructure. This is beneficial to increasing Hong Kong’s productivity. We should not be afraid of spending money in this area.”

Despite these positive words caution was urged in two specific areas. Firstly, the participants warned government not to alter the non-interventionist policies on which much of Hong Kong’s success has been built. And secondly, they urged government to keep control and explain in more detail the labour supply issue which will undoubtedly arise as a result of the proposed initiatives.

Also the Foundations submission drew attention to Mr. Andy Ho’s view to the need of further deliberation on press freedom rather than having it briefly mentioned in the Chief Executive’s Policy Speech.

“The policy address came from the heart of the Chief Executive. He wants Hong Kong to succeed and he is bringing a structured business mind to the issue of government. He is thinking long-term and he is thinking issues which affect us all. He should be applauded” said Mr George Yuen. “Our Forum, which contained participants from different political and ideological backgrounds demonstrated that the Chief Executive can bring people together because at heart we all care about the future of our home.”

He concluded: “The Better Hong Kong Foundation will continue to provide Forums for intellectual debate and will be happy to share the output with government. After all we share a common interest – a better Hong Kong”.

Participants

 

1. Dr. Leonard K.Cheng, Head of Department of Economics, School of Business and Management, the HKUST
2. Mr Andy Ho, Political Commentator
3. Dr. Francis Lui, Director of Centre For Economic Development, School of Business and Management, the HKUST
4. Dr. Richard Yue-chim Wong, Director of School Of Business, the University of Hong Kong
5. Mr. Tsang Kam Yan, Executive Director of the Hong Kong Society For The Aged

The Better Hong Kong Foundation’s submission in response to The HKSAR Chief Executive’s policy speech

Background

The Better Hong Kong Foundation believes that Hong Kong will be a better place to live and to do business following the resumption of Chinese sovereignty on July 1, 1997. It is the Better Hong Kong Foundation’s mission to contribute to the process of making Hong Kong a better city in the future. As part of this mission, the Better Hong Kong Foundation yesterday organised a discussion forum immediately after the HKSAR Chief Executive’s maiden Policy Speech in the Provisional Legislative Council. We invited five respected academics, social services experts and commentators to express their views on the policies proposed by the Chief Executive and to discuss recommendations for the HKSAR Government.

The discussion panel comprised:

• Dr. Leonard K. Cheng, Head of Department of Economics, School of Business and Management, the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
• Mr. Andy Ho, Political Commentator
• Dr. Francis Lui, Director of Centre for Economic Development, School of Business and Management, the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
• Dr. Richard Yue-chim Wong, Director of School of Business, the University of Hong Kong
• Mr. Tsang Kam Yan, Executive Director of the Hong Kong Society For The Aged.

The discussion was facilitated by Mr. George Yuen, Chief Executive of the Better Hong Kong Foundation.

The enclosed submission is based on yesterday’s discussion and is made jointly by the Better Hong Kong Foundation and the Panelists. We hope that the submission will be useful for the SAR Government in its efforts to create a better future for the people of Hong Kong.

Introduction

The Better Hong Kong Foundation and the Panelists believe that the Chief Executive’s Policy Address was comprehensive and forward-looking. It touched upon many areas that are of public interest. Mr. Tung focused on the long term and on fundamental developments in the territory, and, as a result, was able to confront some of the long-standing issues that have faced Hong Kong over the past few decades. We are glad that concrete measures will be taken by the Government to tackle those issues. We also agree with the Chief Executive’s philosophy of maintaining Hong Kong’s economic growth and competitiveness as a means to achieve the final end of providing a home for everyone. The Chief Executive is to increase future government expenditure in a prudent way while not overlooking the cares and concerns of those in need. The Better Hong Kong Foundation and the Panelists have some specific areas of concern, but these do not detract from our overall view that this was a good Policy Speech. Below, we discuss our views, concerns and recommendations concerning specific policy areas.

Housing

We believe that the Chief Executive has consulted a wide spectrum of experts before coming up with the many measures proposed in the Policy Speech to solve the housing problem. While most of the proposed measures build upon or enhance existing measures, we are glad to see such breakthroughs as:

• The sale of public housing flats
• The speeding up of urban redevelopment
• The provision of a large number of (up to 9,000) luxury flats by 2002

We believe that if all the proposed measures, including the above breakthroughs, can be implemented as scheduled, property prices will be stabilised in the long run.

“If all these measures are implemented and a large number of flats are built, I think it will definitely be able to stabilise property prices in the long run. There might even be healthy adjustments,” said Prof. Richard Wong.

However, we have reservations about whether all these measures can be implemented as planned. We still have to hear concrete Government proposals on how to ensure that these measures are carried out. One of the major obstacles is the time needed to approve any particular new housing development. To speed up the rate of approval process, we would recommend that the Government looks into the possibility of establishing a central authority to handle the various approvals required for a new housing project which are currently handled by separate government departments.

Our other recommendations:

• Increase the number of public housing flats offered for sale. The target of 25,000 flats a year over the next ten years is not sufficient to meet the demand. This limited supply might lead to widespread discontent among public housing tenants, as inequality will be obvious.
• A more thorough study is needed on the pilot scheme for tendering sites and ensuring 30% of the flats are handed to the Government for sale. This is a new scheme which may have serious implications for the fundamentals of Hong Kong’s economy.

Education

The Better Hong Kong Foundation and the Panelists are glad to see that the Chief Executive has made a strong commitment to improving Hong Kong’s education. We believe that the Chief Executive has grasped the correct fundamentals and has proposed to invest in the right areas – such as the training of teachers, information technology and civic education. We are particularly impressed by the comprehensive proposal to introduce information technology education to schools.

We would recommend:

• That the Government strengthen anti-corruption education among youngsters and give it the same priority as civic education. We make this recommendation following the latest ICAC survey, which indicated that the tolerance of Hong Kong youngsters towards corruption had jumped in the past five years. However, little in the Policy Speech addressed this serious problem.
• To complement the Government’s drive to extend education in information technology, we would like to see the Government speed up the pace of releasing government information via information technology.

The Elderly

The Chief Executive has adopted a prudent approach for providing welfare for the elderly. Although most of his proposed measures only begin to address the longer-standing issues, they do deal with basic demands to improve welfare provisions for the elderly to a more reasonable level. We particularly welcome the increase in the monthly CSSA payment by $380 (or 18.4%), which is quite substantial.

Mr. Tsang Kam Yan said, “The proposals are conservative…There are some fundamental changes. For example, the establishment of the Elderly Commission; the merging of the annual Chinese New Year Grant and the Social and Recreational Activities Grant into the CSSA monthly payment; the establishment of Carer’s Support and Resource Centres. All these are breakthroughs. Regarding the shortfalls, Mr. Tung is trying to rectify these in a gradual way. This shows a great deal of caution about not putting a heavy burden on society.”

We agree with the Chief Executive’s basic principle of increasing care and services for the elderly instead of merely increasing the amount of monetary support. While additional money meets individuals’ short-term needs, the increase in care and services is more fundamental and will more effectively help the elderly in the long run.

Economy

The new initiatives outlined in the Policy Speech will result in an addition $88 billion in capital expenditure. We believe that this is still a prudent approach because a large part of the expenditure will be spent on increasing Hong Kong’s long-term productivity and competitiveness. Prof. Francis Lui explained, “(a large part of the $88 billion) will be spent on infrastructure. This is beneficial to increasing Hong Kong’s productivity. We should not be afraid of spending money in this area. People will not see it as a drastic change in the government philosophy of managing finances in a prudent way.”

We agree with the Chief Executive’s thinking, which we believe is central to the Policy Speech, of maintaining Hong Kong’s economic growth as a means to achieving the goal of creating wealth and greater prosperity for everyone. As Prof. Leonard Cheng noted, “The Chief Executive has said before that it is important to create a bigger pie in the first place before talking about distribution. If the pie stays small, benefits to individuals will only be limited.”

We have specific concerns about:

• While it is the intention of the SAR Government to provide more care and concern for the community, this appears to have changed the Government’s conventional role of non-intervention. The possible implications and potential problems that may arise as a result should not be overlooked.
• In order to implement all the proposed initiatives in the Policy Speech, there will be tremendous demands on the labour supply. It seems inevitable that more foreign workers will need to be imported. But this issue was not directly addressed in the Policy Speech.

Others

Mr. Andy Ho suggested that the Chief Executive should have the Government’s position on Article 23 of the Basic Law so as to ease the worries of journalists in Hong Kong. “He (the Chief Executive) spoke for two hours but only 23 seconds were spent on the topic (of press freedom). The Hong Kong Journalists Association has repeatedly expressed their worries about Article 23 to the Chief Executive…. It is inadequate for the Chief Executive to just say that our press freedom will be safeguarded.” (The panel did not have a single position on this issue.)

The Conclusion

We appreciate the Chief Executive’s Policy Speech was made from the heart. It was pragmatic but forward-looking; prudent but caring. We know that these new initiatives alone will not fulfill all that needs to be done to make Hong Kong a better society. But we believe that by addressing fundamental and long-standing issues, he is moving in the right direction.

BHKF’s Commitments

The Better Hong Kong Foundation will continue to provide a forum for intellectual debate about Government policies and to gather views for submission to the Government.

We are also committed to playing a part in helping improve Hong Kong in the new millennium. As we plan our activities in the future, we will continue to explore the possibility of matching our ideas with the philosophy and policies of the SAR Government as laid out in the Chief Executive’s Policy Speech.

One of our important efforts is our series of Economic Studies which we began in March 1996. Six more studies will be completed by the end of this year. They are on Old Age Security Schemes; Structural Transformation and Integration of Hong Kong and Southern China; Tourism Industry; Immigration Policy; Hong Kong and the Pacific Community; and Past, Present and Future.

The studies are commissioned by the Better Hong Kong Foundation and coordinated by the Hong Kong Centre for Economic Research. The Better Hong Kong Foundation will present these reports to the SAR Government and interested organisations.

Previously, we released the findings of studies on the role of technology and industry in Hong Kong; trade and investment flows between Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan; and port facilities and container handling services.