When people talk of the 'political neutrality' of Hong Kong's civil service, they seldom pause to consider its meaning.
Political neutrality is, or at least should be, an important feature of the British system of civil service, after which Hong Kong's system is supposed to be modelled. There are significant differences, however, between the two.
The neutrality of the civil service in Britain goes with parliamentary democracy and ministerial responsibility. The minister, a directly elected representative of the people, is the political head of each government department. He takes decisions and defends government policy in parliamentary debates.
The senior civil servants in the department advise the minister and execute his decisions. They should remain non-political and give loyal service to the government, whichever the ruling party is. When a new government is elected, the civil servants remain in office, and advise their new minister in the same way as they advised his predecessor.
The situation in Hong Kong is quite different. Without an elected government, senior civil servants are responsible for making and defending government policy.
This did not cause any problem in the past, when civil servants did not have to worry about changes in government. With an 'executive-led' government headed by a governor from London, the consistency of policy in the administration of Hong Kong was seldom paralleled elsewhere.