I have been a part of Hong Kong's civil service for more than three decades. Through- out my entire career I have worked with many people whose driving impulse has been to serve Hong Kong. That remains as true today as it did almost 40 years ago, when I first entered government.
The past couple of weeks have been among the most momentous periods since our reunification with China in 1997, and it has left me in the hot seat as Hong Kong's acting chief executive. It is not easy to describe the enormous level of responsibility I feel.
What sets Hong Kong apart is our ability to sustain social stability and economic growth. One key element of our success is the institutions that buttress our development. These include our legal system, which is underpinned by an independent judiciary, our legislature, and our civil service. Each operates independently but is an integral part of the whole. In short, ours is a system of government like many others.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
However, Hong Kong has some distinguishing features, including a very internationally minded and outward-looking government, owing to our close integration into world markets long before globalization became a catchphrase. Within the ranks of our civil service and judiciary are nationals from Britain, Australia, the US, Canada and India.
Moreover, our Court of Final Appeal calls on some of the most esteemed minds of the common-law world. We have a large foreign population and one of the world's largest consular corps. International chambers of commerce play a very active and vital role in government consultations. Our Basic Law even allows for foreign nationals to be elected to one-fifth of the seats in our legislature.
Hong Kong's cosmopolitanism long ago planted the seeds of tolerance and respect in our approach to government. As a result, we are committed to dialogue and compromise as the only way to balance the many competing demands and opinions that pervade public affairs. Good government is not a competition. It's not about winning or losing, or whose view or will prevails. It is about making the best decisions for the community as a whole.
Inevitably, this will often involve compromise. Indeed, as Hong Kong's society has grown more sophisticated, it has also become more complex, multi-faceted, and pluralistic. This means that government can no longer afford to view issues in isolation; its operations need to be de-compartmentalized and flattened, as well as streamlined. This is a difficult task, given that some of our systems have been in place for many years, often entrenched in law.
Of course, pragmatism has its limits, because good government is also about upholding core values. I have often referred to what I call the four pillars of Hong Kong's success: the rule of law, a level playing field for business, a clean and efficient civil service, and the free flow of information. These are values that we simply will not compromise. To do so would mark the beginning of the end for Hong Kong.
Since reunification, we have the added safeguard of the Basic Law, which gives effect to the principles of "one country, two systems" and "Hong Kong's people running Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy."
Good government also requires sharing a vision of the future -- the purposes and thinking behind public policies -- with the community. Our vision is to develop Hong Kong as Asia's world city. This is an all-encompassing brief, covering everything we do as a community and an economy in areas ranging from international trade to art, culture and tourism.
The Basic Law embodies this vision, laying the foundations for our development over a 50-year period and providing the freedom and the power for us to position ourselves as Asia's world city -- and to do it on our own. At the same time, it also embodies the depth of the central government's support for Hong Kong. It is thus crucial to the good governance of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region.
In many areas -- financial services, infrastructure, communications technology and tourism -- I would say we have reached our goals for Hong Kong. Hardly a day goes by when we don't read something in the local press that refers to our status as Asia's world city. Even when people feel we have not lived up to the standards expected of a world city, we are glad to be held to a high benchmark, because it keeps us on our toes.
That may sound disingenuous to some, but Hong Kong's officials share a common mission to maintain the stability and prosperity of our city. Our duty is to make Hong Kong a better place for us all, without hidden agendas or quid pro quos. It is an onerous and solemn undertaking, uplifting one day and extremely frustrating the next. But, above all, it is an honor and a privilege to play such a role in our society, and I know that the vast majority of officials, legislators, judges and civil servants with whom I've worked would agree.
Donald Tsang (曾
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US