 | |
| Hong Kong Chief Executive CY Leung: The wolf in sheep's clothing |
Hong Kong is the most free-market place in the world, according to the Heritage Foundation survey several years running. It has a highly educated work force. These factors may be a substantial competitive advantage for companies seeking to do business in Hong Kong. But its legal system is beyond doubt the prime pillar for guaranteeing transparency and fairness in business. In a city that has deep social divisions and steep income disparities, CY Leung's views are certain to provoke controversy and further alienate him from the masses. Above all, it confirms that the government is committed to continuing to allow the interests of "big business" to prevail over that of citizens. In August 2014, CY said: “The business community is in reality a very small group of elites in Hong Kong who control the destiny of the economy in Hong Kong. If we ignore their interests, Hong Kong capitalism will stop (working).” This is the apparent rationalisation for the decision from our political masters for all future CE candidates to be pre-screened. That screening, by a nominating committee dominated by business interests, supposedly insulates candidates from popular pressure to create a welfare state, and would instead "allow the city government to follow more business-friendly policies to address economic inequality". In fact, it creates a Chief Executive who depends on business votes to get elected, so go figure.
CY Leung said that the words "broadly representative" used in the Basic Law are not about numeric representation. “You
have to take care of all the sectors in Hong Kong as much as you can,”
he said, “and if it’s entirely a numbers game and numeric
representation, then obviously you would be talking to half of the
people in Hong Kong who earn less than (US)$1,800 a month... Then you would end up with that kind of politics and policies.”In
other words, the HK and PRC governments have been playing a numbers
game with us to deprive the people of a choice of leaders who are
accountable to the people of the city. I'm glad the cat is out of the bag.
While civil libertarians would be aghast at his comments, I feel that CY is actually trying to convince the western world that the "Beijing model" of unfettered capitalism devoid of natural justice deserves their support too. He probably hopes that "external forces", which he accuses of supporting pro-democracy protesters in the city, will see the interest in supporting Chinese capitalism instead of the democracy movement. However, the Hong Kong government, even in colonial times has espoused "positive non-intervention" in business, and that non-intervention has made big business so powerful that their interests are difficult to ignore or overcome. Our undersized government has failed miserably to implement "business-friendly policies to address economic inequality" that Leung says the government wants to encourage. Such policies, including any attempts at introducing democracy to the city, have been subverted by the business people at every turn since time immemorial. That unfettered sweat-shop capitalism has resulted in sharp wealth gap (as shown by the city's gini coefficient, which is among the highest in the developed world); the average citizen has little or no retirement provision or comprehensive medical provision; small shops are squeezed out by the hegemonist developers.
Hong Kong economy is synonymous with property development. Real estate projects in the city are highly lucrative, with developers having recurring net profitability levels in the 30-40 percent range – something that is unheard of elsewhere in the world, yet few of the younger generation would ever hope to be able to afford their own homes. The city's wealth is highly concentrated in the hands of the five families who also control the city's most powerful estate developers. Developers also control huge swathes of buildings and shopping malls, and can dictate what businesses can and cannot set up within them. The level of elevated profitability makes Sun Hung Kai the most valuable property developer in the world by market capitalisation. I wonder what CY meant when he said, before the protests began, that although Beijing's rigid framework is non-negotiable, modification of other parameters were still possible. So I'm wondering what he had in mind.
While free exchange of goods and services brings undeniable benefits to all sectors of society, the Hong Kong model is so lop-sided that there is little social mobility, and the rich will certainly gain at the expense of the poor. Neither Hong Kong nor China are interested in the citizenry, which wants fuller and faster democratisation and an end to political cronyism with big business. CY's declaration that the rotten boroughs are a necessary part of Hong Kong's electoral politics leaves him with little room for manoeuvre in the face of protesters' demands.
The heavy influence enjoyed by business elites in the city is set to continue from here on end. We needn't hold our breath for his administration to offer us anything substantial. The government and the people remain on collision course. In the words of the song: "Poor people gonna rise up and get their share; Poor people gonna rise up and take what's theirs". A luta continua.
*Keith Bradsher and Chris Buckley (20 October 2014). "Hong Kong Leader Reaffirms Unbending Stance on Elections"
*David Webb (21 October 2014). "Broadly representative of wealth"