Leung's policy address hits the mark, but the big challenge lies ahead
Joseph Cheng says the policy directions laid out by Leung will not gain traction without support from Legco and the public, and that is currently in short supply in our fractious society
Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying's first policy address was a crucial moment for his administration, which didn't have the benefit of a "honeymoon" period as a result of the scandals that have plagued its first six months. Leung certainly hopes that this will convince the community to give him a chance to do a good job.
His most significant asset is that the government has ample financial resources to implement policy reforms. If Hong Kong people support the proposals, as is the case for 15 years of free education, few critics can say that the community cannot afford them.
During his election campaign, Leung's obvious edge over his main rival Henry Tang Ying-yen was his reformist orientation; and, at the current stage of Hong Kong's development, people want to see serious reform to enhance the economy's international competitiveness and improve social services so as to raise their living standards.
Doubts about his integrity remain Leung's major liability. His popularity hit a new low just before the policy address, and his illegal construction scandals have not been settled. A substantial segment of the pro-democracy movement is now asking for him to step down. Yet, with the backing of the Chinese authorities, this is quite inconceivable, at least in the coming two years or so, because of Beijing's concern for the special administrative region's political stability, its unwillingness to lose face since the chief executive was appointed by Chinese leaders, and the absence of a "Plan B" for the time being.
In view of the high expectations on the part of the people and the administration itself, it was always going to be difficult for Leung to score high marks for his policy address.
It had to be comprehensive, because people want to see a policy blueprint for the next five, if not 10, years; and it had to deliver a long-term vision as well as effective short-term measures. Given all the circumstances, the administration cannot claim to have carried out adequate consultation; and it can easily be criticised for what has been left unsaid.
On the other hand, the chief executive managed to offer a good analysis of Hong Kong's deep-seated socio-economic problems and satisfactory broad policy directions to tackle these issues. This is an improvement over the complacency and inaction of the Donald Tsang Yam-kuen administration. But such insights do not translate to immediate, visible benefit to Hong Kong people. Hence the policy address is unlikely to do much to raise Leung's popularity.