Poor defence
Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen attended a special Legislative Council session on Thursday to explain his part in recent revelations of his friendly ties with tycoons and address the issue of potential conflicts of interest.
The whole affair is beyond doubt a trial by media and public opinion or, worse, a Hong Kong-style cultural revolution. Under existing legislation, section 3 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance is not applicable to the chief executive. Unless there is sufficient evidence to prove that Tsang has transferred benefits to others, it should not culminate in a verdict that any criminal offence was committed.
However, times have changed as people have generally become more politically aware. Public expectations of civil servants and especially their leaders have become much higher. Understandably, they expect top officials to have unusually high personal moral standards and be 'whiter than white'.
Having learned his lesson from this painful episode, Tsang should do his best to prevent similar incidents by improving the regulatory system that handles potential conflicts of interest for top officials.
As head of our administrative authority, the chief executive's conduct concerns not just himself but the entire government and its authority to govern. During the past weeks, when Tsang was being scrutinised and officials were being accused of misconduct in a controversy over a design competition for West Kowloon, the head of the civil service was almost invisible in the public arena.
As head of the 160,000-strong civil service and political officials, Chief Secretary Stephen Lam Sui-lung should have explained the government's policies to minimise public concerns and dispel suspicions. This is especially necessary in the guidelines on the declaration of interest concerning the chief executive, and the West Kowloon row, in which Leung Chun-ying was said to have failed to declare a potential conflict of interest.
Lam would have been the best person to explain the relevant policies. He is the ultimate defender of the public system, and thus he should have taken the lead.
Unfortunately, he has been relatively invisible in the public arena since taking office late last year. He has remained tight-lipped on the scandals surrounding the chief executive and the two leadership candidates. It is irresponsible of him to have left the task of addressing the public to his subordinates.
Lam has long suffered low popularity ratings because the public doesn't believe he is capable. His past performance as secretary for constitutional and mainland affairs also failed to meet public expectations. Although the constitutional reform package was passed, there is still widespread concern in society.
The government certainly doesn't need a political opportunist who only looks out for himself. A person like that will do more harm than good and will adversely affect the authority of the administration. No matter who becomes the next chief executive, there should be absolutely no place for Lam in the next administration.
