A clear warning to HK in any language
For generations, the people of Hong Kong have endured difficult circumstances and yet managed to work hard at developing skills that make them competitive in the global business arena. To a certain extent, Hong Kong as a city already had natural geographical advantages which made it a popular destination for international trade. It was, and still is, the gateway to China, while its former colonial status created English as an official language, and its pleasant environment made it an obvious place for an Asian headquarters.
But it was the people who turned that latent advantage into real strengths. The education levels, creative ability, and language proficiency of Hong Kong's top talent in both the public and private sector can put their counterparts in some of the largest economies in the world to shame. Within just a few decades, Hong Kong became an international financial centre alongside London and New York.
But last week our city received two reminders that in spite of the remarkable achievements of the past few decades, we cannot afford to be complacent, and that Hong Kong could easily be knocked off its perch as the most popular destination for multinational corporations in Asia. In one survey of places speaking English as a second language, Hong Kong was rated as only having 'moderate proficiency', coming second in a table of Asian countries behind Malaysia. Hong Kong's 54.44 points was only marginally better than South Korea and Japan.
For a city that likes to advertise itself as Asia's world city, being moderately proficient at English is not good enough. It is not quite time to panic yet, since Hong Kong's advantage with the Chinese language will still equip residents with more competitive business skills. Furthermore, even the survey itself recognises that the results cannot be said to be fully representative of the whole city. It is unlikely that the many overseas, or elite-school, educated students would have taken these online tests or tests in the language courses which make up the scores. Nevertheless, the survey still suggests a relatively poor proficiency among those who do come across such tests. Hong Kong can hardly call itself an international city if only a concentrated minority have a high proficiency in a second language.
A more pressing warning against Hong Kong's international status last week came from property analysts who noted that even multinational companies are being put off by the high property prices and lack of long-term planning. Singapore is already becoming more popular among families with young children, but its long-term planning and expansion of the commercial district is attracting whole companies as well.
In contrast, Hong Kong's business district remains packed into Central, with available office space decreasing at the rate rents are increasing. So far, the government has not been able to offer any attractive alternatives, preferring to continue concentrating people and traffic in Central.
The potential decline in the city's attraction as a business centre reflects the feelings of residents. There is no conflict between policies aimed at improving the city for residents, and policies aimed at attracting foreign firms. People like or dislike living here for the same reasons, whether they are locals or expatriate businessmen. The government and the people must not underestimate the importance of sustainable, long-term policies that will ensure our city becomes an increasingly attractive place in which to live and work.
