Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, in preparation for her next Policy Address, is currently collecting views and ideas from all walks of life and political organizations. She has revealed that she will discuss political matters and show Hong Kong society as well as the central authorities her resolve and plan for putting the political scene in the right order. I am confident, given that Hong Kong still faces challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic, including the possibility of another wave of infections and the deeply stunned economy, the new Policy Address will present a raft of policy measures to contain COVID-19 while working on solutions for economic and public health recovery. That said, the new Policy Address should include a socioeconomic development strategy for the next five to 10 years, because Hong Kong society needs a clear goal and a course toward it.
The 2020 Policy Address is to be presented on Oct 14, which is why most of the policies and measures it covers will be aimed at the year 2021. Just a reminder for Hong Kong society: The country will begin implementing the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-25) next year. President Xi Jinping noted in his speech at a symposium with the country’s top socioeconomic experts on Aug 24, “In the 14th Five-Year Plan period, our nation after achieving the first ‘centennial goal’ (of becoming a relatively well-off society by the time the Communist Party of China celebrates its 100th anniversary in July 2021), will sustain the momentum and start pursuing the second ‘centennial goal’ of becoming a socialist and modernized country by the time the People’s Republic of China reaches 100 years of age on Oct 1, 2049. It will be the beginning of a new phase of development for the nation”. Hong Kong’s future growth requires the integration of its own development into the national development strategy, which means Lam must have an intermediate- to-long-term development strategy for Hong Kong.
Hong Kong does have intermediate- to-long-term development plans for certain concerns, such as land supply and new town construction projects, of which the SAR government has made projections some years into the future. Lam proposed in her 2018 Policy Address the Lantau Tomorrow Vision — an intermediate- to-long-term development plan to create a sizable swath of land through reclamation to the east of Lantau Island for residential housing, offices and commercial as well as recreational facilities. So far, however, the government has not come up with a future socioeconomic development plan for the whole Hong Kong.
In the past 23 years, consecutive terms of the SAR government have followed the same planning and execution process developed under British rule for land supply and new town construction projects. One of the main reasons why the SAR government has yet to make an intermediate- to-long-term plan for socioeconomic development is apparently the fear of or aversion to the “socialism” political taboo, even though it is a shameful bias.
Modern governance must satisfy the needs of modern socioeconomic development. For example, in 1946, then-French president Charles de Gaulle introduced the country’s first five-year plan for postwar economic recovery. Its theme was “modernization or decadence”. The choice was of course modernization, which would be achieved by the rejuvenation of six pillar industries: coal mining, power generation, iron and steel production, transportation, farm mechanization and cement production. Fast-forward to March this year, French President Emmanuel Macron publicly conceded it was necessary to keep the supply of certain anti-epidemic necessities and services out of the free market to safeguard public interest and save lives. More recently Macron appointed Francois Bayrou, an influential centrist, as high commissioner of planning. The newly created post is tasked with “imagining” what France will look like in 2030 and to come up with a plan for developing a low-carbon economy, including which economic areas should be given more investment to meet future needs in flexible working models and strengthening of indigenous industries.
Hong Kong already has some intertwined deep-seated socioeconomic structural problems inherited mainly because successive terms of the SAR government all failed to be the trailblazer in long-term planning for overall socioeconomic development. All they cared to do was to address topical issues instead of fixing the root causes. And in doing so, they let small complaints become severe chronic conditions.
Take the short supply of land and housing for example, the root lies in the existing economic structure, which relies on the real estate sector controlled by a handful of conglomerates. Efforts by successive terms of the SAR government to develop so-called brown lots and create more usable land by reclamation have been consistently thwarted by various interest groups over the years, of which a ready example can be found in plans to develop Lantau Island being fiercely opposed and ambushed by environmentalist groups backed by business interests allergic to government-funded public housing projects. Today it is impossible for the SAR government to address major socioeconomic issues without a basket of compromises with various interest groups to get started.
For decades Hong Kong has been told to believe in a myth, or fairy tale, that private enterprise and the free market can and will find the right (suitable) path. Such hocus-pocus can be traced back to the 1950s and 1960s, after which Hong Kong found itself increasingly dependent on the government for development guidance and incentives. Starting in the 1970s, the British Hong Kong government replaced its motto of non-interventionism with active non-interventionism.
Just a few years before Hong Kong’s return to China, however, then-financial secretary Sir Hamish Macleod abruptly declared active non-intervention obsolete, only to eat his words shortly afterward and embrace active non-interventionism again. Needless to say, the quick about-face was necessary for the United Kingdom to leave a prosperous Hong Kong behind and there was no point showing the Hong Kong SAR of the PRC the need for long-term socioeconomic development planning.
The SAR government is the embodiment of “Hong Kong people administering Hong Kong” and therefore obligated to ensure the long-term well-being of Hong Kong residents. That is why the SAR government has no excuse not to abandon active non-interventionism for good and integrate Hong Kong’s development into the nation’s overall development strategy. To do so, it needs an intermediate- to-long-term socioeconomic development plan of its own.
The author is a senior research fellow of China Everbright Holdings.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
