Tung Chee-hwa not only announced his renewed candidacy as Chief Executive last Thursday before 800 supporters. He also confessed to errors, poor judgments, and other deficiencies in the first term, which he would like to correct in the second. Most of those attending the rally in the Convention Center admired his honesty, even if many did not agree with the some of the works he had done since July 1997 when hopes and expectations were high.

The Chief Executive assumed office four and a half years ago under very trying circumstances. He was thrust alone into a job presiding over a civil service that was accustomed to British rule and suspicious of an outsider, especially someone with no experience in government administration. Not only the structure he had inherited was awkward, so too were his advisors left from the colonial period and also senior officials who did not feel beholden to anyone.

The subsequent struggle for power and influence between the Chief Executive and his supposed subordinates confused and divided the rest of the community to the point in which policies were misapplied, government performance suffered and some civil servants were in virtual mutiny. When new Presidents and Prime Ministers take charge, they bring in their own team and purge the old. Tung did not have that luxury and had to "use the materials at hand". Many may want Tung for five more years but no one wants a replay of past fiascoes. Hong Kong needs dynamic leadership, not more dithering, to help it emerge from its second recession in four years.

The Chief Executive was hampered from the start by a clumsy political structure. While the public agreed with an "executive-led administration", as the Basic Law prescribed, it also sought accountability, checks, balances and efficiency. Tung in 1997 had his Cabinet, an Executive Council, which made the policy decisions that the civil service was not always eager to implement. He also did not have a supporting political cast - a ruling party - in the Legislative Council. The consequence was paralysis, mistrust and misunderstanding all around which gave people the impression that Hong Kong was adrift, the government did not know what it was doing, and the Chief Executive did not care or was out his depth.

During his first term Tung has regularly rejected proposals from Legco and alienated many, including groups who once shared his vision but are now disillusioned, if not also angry. He cannot continue to ignore, scoff at, or distance himself from his core constituents - those who represent the business sector, the patriotic unions and pragmatists. No leader anywhere can prevail by antagonizing his natural supporters, closing his ears to dissent, and filling his office with those who would only tell him what he wants to hear.

The Chief Executive will have to find his way by finding the political missing link to connect his Exco to Legco. He has to consult those who are fundamentally for his programs and to treat them as his de facto ruling party of parliament. Those not for his policies can then become the loyal opposition, which is universal in all democratic legislative assemblies. Legco, which represents the people, is not his enemy but a channel to the public.

Tung must take advantage of his second mandate rather than squander the goodwill as he had done with the first. He has to be courageous enough to serve the public's interest before he does that of the civil servants. The Chief Executive has to say "no" sometimes to his 186,000 public employees and adjust their pay and perks to reflect current economic conditions. Tung has to reduce the structural financial deficit not by raising revenue through more taxes but by lowering expenditure through prudence and austerity. He has to reform the "quangos" - entrenched statutory authorities that have abused their power and privileges - as Legco unanimously urged him to do last Wednesday. Within the one system of Hong Kong, there cannot be coddling of the civil service and the quangos matched by discrimination against everyone else.

But politics can never be an end in itself, rather a means to the common objective of "prosperity and stability". Those ready to vote for Tung for the second term think he is their man principally because he understands business - the lifeblood of Hong Kong - and has fostered constructive ties to the mainland. Anybody else, however more astute, cannot get anywhere without the support of the Central Government.

Two consecutive recessions have sobered this community to one overwhelming reality: Hong Kong's economic future is inextricably dependent on the mainland, especially now after its accession to the World Trade Organization. Neither North America nor Europe, still reeling from the shocks of depression consumer demand and terrorist attacks, can pull Hong Kong out of the slump. China can, with a Gross Domestic Production growth estimated to be seven percent for this year and a rapidly opening market. Tung has proven his mettle here by being able to gain the trust and support of the Central Government, which has conceded to his request for more mainland visitors to boost Hong Kong's flagging tourist trade. He has also managed to convince the mainland authorities to ease travel of expatriates living in the Special Administrative Region and cater for Hong Kong's interests in national development.

The Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce wants him to do more in what he has done reasonably well. Small and medium enterprises have again appealed to Tung to negotiate a regional trade agreement with the Central Government to give these companies fair access to the mainland market that is now more welcoming to foreign corporations. They would like to see him establish more trade offices on the mainland rather than waste resources on some dubious overseas postings designed, it seems, to provide long vacations for senior civil servants.

Tung's job is not done. He has yet to persuade the Central Government to abolish exchange controls for people coming to Hong Kong to visit and invest. Hong Kong belongs to "one country", China, and should not be considered a foreign territory, to which compatriots are discouraged from spending. Hong Kong has no such exchange controls, which is a reason why several hundreds of thousands of residents here go north everyday to consume and stimulate the mainland economy. Tung has to ask for fair play and, chances are, because of his good relations with the Central Government and also the provinces, he will get it.

The Chief Executive remains a work in progress and, while his first term report card may not be satisfactory, has shown promise. The public may not be overly fond of Tung - and indeed it is very disappointed, judging by the opinion polls - but it is wrong to blame him for all the problems. What he makes of himself from herein, however, is his own doing. History is less forgiving than are the people of Hong Kong.

Close Window| Print this page