I tabled a motion in Legco last week. I suggested that the government issue multiple visas to high earning visitors from the mainland. I also suggested that it add an investor category of mainland immigrants. I was pleasantly surprised that my motion passed overwhelmingly and that the Secretary Regina Ip said my proposal could work.

Hong Kong is right now losing consumers. Every weekend 300,000 people cross Lowu into Shenzhen. Last year alone they spent an estimated $35 billion over there, equal to about 15 per cent of our consumer spending. We have to think of a way to reverse the traffic and recover some of the loss.

The way to do that is to allow high-income people from the mainland to come to Hong Kong more easily to visit, spend, and, in some cases, live. In recent years China has created a class of entrepreneurs, professionals, and IT experts. Typically a lawyer earns upward of $10,000 a month, a technologist double as much, and an executive $50,000 or more. Shenzhen just happens to be one of the highest earning cities in China.

Many of these people in Shenzhen are from other regions of China. We know that because each day there're at least a dozen flights out of Shenzhen for Beijing alone. We could get these people to spend weekends and holidays in Hong Kong rather than in other cities if we make it easier for them to travel here. The answer is a simple multiple entry visa.

Critics of my motion say they're afraid that these people would overstay. I don't buy that argument. People of such an income level with steady employment aren't going to go underground, take up jobs in construction sites and restaurants, or enter into a life of vice.

Others also say my motion, if turned into a policy, would discriminate against the poor. I don't buy that argument either. The fact is all countries discriminate, if that's the word, against visitors without money and steady employment.

More and more mainland Chinese are becoming tourists nowadays. They find it ironic that it's less bureaucratic for them to travel to countries in Southeast Asia than to Hong Kong. We've become perhaps too arrogant in thinking all Chinese want to overstay in our city. Those who've seen Paris, London and San Francisco might find Hong Kong the way we find it - expensive, rude and polluted.

The main problem is that our government has set a quota of 1,200 tourists from the mainland a day. We're, therefore, forcing people who want to come to pay between $1,000 and $2,000 each for a visa. If we give people multiple visas at a one off fee, we reduce their cost and we also bring more business to our shops.

The more controversial part of my motion was my suggestion that the government negotiate with the Central Government for a new investor category of immigrants. Over the past four years, since our return to Chinese sovereignty, China has developed at a pace we'd never anticipated. There're now tens of thousands of affluent Chinese. Some of them are given exit visas to immigrate and live abroad. I think it's important that we recruit these people rather than see them settle in Singapore, Canada the United States, and so on, taking their talent and assets with them.

Right now Hong Kong has an exclusively family reunion immigration policy towards the mainland Chinese. I support this program. I, however, want our immigration policy to be reviewed and broadened.

Each day we let in 150 people from the mainland. Nearly all of them are job seekers or are young dependents of Hong Kong residents from the lower income group. They've contributed to the widening gap between the rich and poor in our society. We must do something about this by letting in about 50 investor immigrants from the mainland a day to address the imbalance and create work and other economic activities.

I think I'm reasonable in suggesting that these economic immigrants bring in at least $5 million each and have business plans. The United States, for example, asks for $7.8 million Hong Kong dollars, Canada $2 million, Singapore $6.5 million, and Australia $3 million from each investor immigrant. We have to set a limit that's neither too low nor too high - too low then it wouldn't do much for our economy and too high we wouldn't be able to persuade them to come.

There's also a bonus in bringing these successful people to Hong Kong. Many of these new immigrants will have the contacts, connections and knowledge to help us seize business opportunities whence they came. This is especially important for us as our other main trading partners go into recession while China continues to bloom.

I'm not so naive as to ignore the dangers of money laundering in and attracting shady people to Hong Kong. But I'm sure that the Chinese government will scrutinize those people it qualifies for an exit visa to immigrate abroad.

Some critics accuse me of class discrimination by wanting to let in the rich. But realistically, all other countries' investor immigration policy only let in the rich. We should open our doors to those who can help us. Since the government has accepted my proposal, I urge it to act quickly. The longer we delay, the more skilled, educated and entrepreneurial Chinese will choose elsewhere at our loss.

Close Window| Print this page