A first protest on March 6 that involved 10,000 demonstrators had ended in a skirmish between police and a group of young protesters.
All this despite the government having announced a budget full of goodies, including a HK$6,000 (S$970) cash handout to all permanent residents 18 years and above and income tax rebates. The tax rebates came after lawmakers had threatened to vote down an earlier proposal for the HK$6,000 handout to be paid into each Hong Konger's Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) accounts, which would have excluded retirees, housewives, the self-employed and civil servants.
The handout is meant to redistribute a surplus of HK$71.3 billion in the previous year's budget. Hong Kong's economy did well last year, with gross domestic product growing 6.8 per cent and unemployment falling from 5.5 per cent in 2009 to 3.8 per cent.
With growth humming along, and a healthy budget, what ails Hong Kongers?
Look at protesters' placards. Some of the banners read: 'Fight for long-term social welfare planning'; 'Oppose the short-sighted budget'; 'Resume the home ownership scheme'; 'Incompetent government, no long-term vision'; 'Money cannot plug our anger!'
The handout was viewed as a sop to unhappy Hong Kongers, a gesture from a government so bereft of ideas, it had to squander taxpayers' money.
A protester by the surname of Pan told Yazhou Zhoukan magazine that he had joined a demonstration for the first time because he 'cannot bear this government anymore'. The businessman charged that the government lacked a long-term policy to help the needy, leading to a widening income gap.
A woman surnamed Chen, who was at the protest with 10 other family members, said she was unhappy with the handouts which she saw as indiscriminate spending of taxpayers' money. She listed her grievances as escalating housing rent, the 'messy' education policy, and the inadequacy of the MPF as retirement funds.
Perhaps, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao best articulated Hong Kong's problems at his annual press conference with local and foreign media last month.
Asked about Hong Kong's loss of regional competitiveness, the Premier listed the special administrative region's (SAR) strengths and what the central government was doing to support it economically. Then he said, 'I have said that Hong Kong needs to pay close attention to the following three things', showing his impatience with the government of Chief Executive Donald Tsang.
Indeed, in 2009, Mr Wen had told Mr Tsang to address 'deep-rooted contradictions' in society. Last year, he asked that more effort be put into long-term development planning.
This time round, he spelt out in public the three things he thought Hong Kong needed: a long-term development plan, 'addressing the underlying problems in its economic and social development', and to 'work hard to improve the people's well-being'.
He stressed the need to focus on education and science and technology to maintain competitiveness and suggested going beyond the services sector to develop small, innovative high-tech enterprises to create more jobs. He said pointedly that the SAR had sufficient reserves to further improve its social safety net and take care of vulnerable groups.
Surely, Hong Kong's government does not need the Premier to tell it what the region's problems are and what it should do. So what accounts for the government's inertia that has allowed things to slide so badly that the usually pragmatic Hong Kongers are going to the barricades with increasing frequency and violence?
Hong Kong analysts suggested several reasons.
One is that this government, made up mainly of bureaucrats, has not shaken off the colonialists' mindset of 'borrowed time, borrowed space' which had led to a largely hands-off approach to managing the economy that led to the failure to build a social safety system. Thus, its preference for short-term fixes like giving handouts to alleviate people's difficulties over proactive long-term planning.
Another reason given, also a legacy of British colonialism, is the land system. Colonial authorities raised money by leasing land - a source of revenue that continues to the present day. Plots hived off are so large that only big developers can bid for them. It is estimated that 45 per cent of the government revenue comes from land, including land premiums, property rates and taxes on property developers' profits. This reliance on real estate creates distortions, with Hong Kong's rent the highest in the world. It has also meant that many Hong Kongers live in cramped government rental flats. The government started a home ownership scheme in 1978 that allowed residents to buy subsidised housing, but this was stopped in 2003 when the property market slumped, and it is reluctant to restart it. Analysts see little chance of the system being reformed as powerful property tycoons will oppose it.
A third reason is the current political system. The Chief Executive, who is elected by a committee of 800, appoints members of the executive council. Lawmakers, who are elected, do not form the government.
The result is a situation in which the executive government has responsibility with no power and the legislature, power with no responsibility. With the two sides often in a stalemate, it is no wonder that the government takes the path of least resistance, that is, short-term palatable measures over long-term planning.
Despite the people's anger, with just little more than a year of its term to go, Mr Tsang's government is unlikely to propose any major changes. It will be left to the new government to effect any social-economic reforms. Hong Kongers will have to pray that the next Chief Executive will have enough vision and sense of ownership to run the gauntlet of an increasingly populist legislature to bring these about. And that political change comes sooner rather than later.
By Goh Sui Noi, Senior Writer
From the Straits Times
suinoi@sph.com.sg
