Hong Kong's opaque governance exposes Exco as a joke
Stephen Vines says colonial hangover adds TV licence row to its bungles
What purpose is served by the Executive Council? This question comes into sharp focus in the wake of the current TV licensing debacle.
Executive councils were an integral part of the British colonial system, established to ensure governors had the local elite on their side and to provide yet more opportunities to reward allies with the trappings of high office. Notably in Hong Kong, the old executive councils also gave the biggest colonial companies a seat at the top table to ensure the preservation of their interests.
Since their establishment, Excos have largely comprised of senior bureaucrats who run government departments. They are rarely prepared to put their careers on the line by upsetting their bosses, so it is safe to assume that, generally speaking, the advice they proffer is what the boss wants to hear.
No wonder this system appealed to Beijing and the old Exco was incorporated into the new constitution. The Basic Law, however, sheds little light on its functions, merely saying that it "shall be an organ for assisting the Chief Executive in policy-making".
There is now intense controversy over whether its members supported, opposed or even seriously considered the new TV licensing regime that has sparked mass protests. One member, Laura Cha Shih May-lung, has a conflict of interest on this matter but the black-box style of governance favoured by the Leung Chun-ying regime will not even reveal whether this was declared.
The only tangible evidence we have of the fruits of Exco’s labours is a series of disasters
Most members of the current Exco, like those of previous councils, are little more than time-servers whose main asset is their loyalty to the chief executive. This situation is not so very different from that which prevailed in the past.