Paul Yeung says years of trial and error show that the city cannot solve deep-seated problems on its own and needs to think outside the 1,000 square kilometer ‘box’ it lives in.

Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said on Monday she had decided to postpone the presentation of the 2020 Policy Address, originally scheduled for today. This is the first time since the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s establishment 23 years ago that the annual Policy Address has been postponed, and it naturally got huge public attention. Her explanation for the delay is that she needs more time to meet with heads of various ministries and commissions of the central government to discuss some of the policies she plans to introduce next year. Those policies, which are designed to facilitate Hong Kong’s economic recovery and future development, can only be implemented with central government support. As always, there is no shortage of personal interpretations and speculation in the public domain about the “real” reason behind the postponement, but they cannot replace objective analysis of the current situation, in which I see the significance from three perspectives.

The Bay Area is positioned to play a critical role in the “internal-external dual circulation mechanism”, with Hong Kong taking full advantage of its expertise and facilities in international finance, common law system and unique status as a free trade hub. Under this circumstance, a mightier Shenzhen is not a bad thing for Hong Kong, not to mention that the five-year pilot reform plan aims to “elevate Shenzhen-Hong Kong cooperation to greater heights”

First, we need to update the definition of “Hong Kong policies”. Hong Kong residents tend to expect all “Hong Kong policies” to be Hong Kong-centric even when they also concern the mainland and involve the central government, meaning they see the latter as the supporting role more often than not. Unfortunately, this kind of exclusive thinking significantly reduces the city’s policy options. This year’s Policy Address is due when Hong Kong finds itself at a critical juncture in the battle to contain the spread of COVID-19 amid numerous political obstructions. The local society generally hopes for the SAR government to implement effective policy measures to not only jumpstart the economy and secure jobs in the short term, but also address complicated chronic issues such as a land shortage for affordable housing and economic development. However, years of repeated trial and error show that Hong Kong cannot solve some of the deep-seated problems on its own and needs to think outside the 1,000 square kilometer “box” it lives in for more policy options and opportunities.

Second, the Policy Address postponement tells residents that national policies benefiting Hong Kong require central government approval and collaboration. In the last 40 years of the nation’s reform and opening-up, we often heard people say “what Hong Kong does best is what the country needs most”, meaning Hong Kong was encouraged to assist the country in socioeconomic development with talent, experience and capital input. These days, the reality is “the country has the strength to help Hong Kong back on its feet when necessary”. Very often, the simple truth is that the country can do what Hong Kong cannot because things have changed. The HKSAR government needs now more than ever to convince the central government of favorable policies that will allow Hong Kong to cooperate with its mainland counterparts in implementing wide-reaching policies.

Last but not least, while the Policy Address is on hold, we can turn our attention to another important subject: What our neighbor Shenzhen has become at 40. President Xi Jinping on Monday started his inspection tour of Guangdong province, with Shenzhen as the highlight when he congratulates the special economic zone on its achievements in the last four decades. The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and State Council on Sunday unveiled a plan on implementing pilot reforms in Shenzhen to build it into a model socialist city with Chinese characteristics in the next five years. The plan gives Shenzhen more decision-making power to expand and deepen reform in major areas and “supports the city in advancing reforms at a higher level from a higher start”, so that it will serve as a core engine of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area development. 

Whenever a Shenzhen-related announcement of this nature emerges, some people automatically voice worries about Shenzhen eventually replacing Hong Kong. Such worries are not entirely groundless since Shenzhen has already surpassed Hong Kong in terms of both gross domestic product growth rate and total value and is showing no sign of slowing down in all-round development. Nevertheless, such worries are unwarranted because they are based on the perceived competition between the neighbors instead of from a national perspective. According to the principle guideline of the Bay Area development program, Hong Kong and Shenzhen will serve as twin engines of development, not a who’s-the-boss relationship. The central authorities decided at this year’s National People’s Congress annual session that the country will adopt a new development pattern characterized by “internal circulation as the main driving force assisted by an internal-external dual circulation mechanism” in the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-25) period. The Bay Area is positioned to play a critical role in the “internal-external dual circulation mechanism”, with Hong Kong taking full advantage of its expertise and facilities in international finance, common law system and unique status as a free trade hub. Under this circumstance, a mightier Shenzhen is not a bad thing for Hong Kong, not to mention that the five-year pilot reform plan aims to “elevate Shenzhen-Hong Kong cooperation to greater heights”. Hong Kong must seize this opportunity to join with Shenzhen as the latter steps up pilot reforms and opening up ahead of the rest of the country in the next stage of quality development.

All said, it is no longer warranted or possible for Hong Kong society to expect all “Hong Kong policies” to be Hong Kong-centric. It is time for Hong Kong to look beyond its fences and formulate far-reaching policies aimed at surmounting obstacles ahead, as well as resolving deep-rooted problems at home.

The author is senior research officer of the One Country Two Systems Research Institute.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.