Ticking along nicely, thank you
For those anxious about air quality, the pace of democracy, the width of the harbour, the sale of car parks or the standing of Hong Kong football, it has not been a particularly good year. Nor is there much cheer for those who, noting the prolonged dereliction of the Kai Tak and Tamar sites, this year's U-turn on the siting of prisons and the Hunghom saga, are aghast at the administration's self-confidence to mastermind plans for a cultural hub.
In many other respects, however, notably for the economy, this year has turned out rather well. Growth looks set to have surpassed the financial secretary's initial forecast of 6 per cent; the budget deficit may turn out to be smaller than expected, even after stripping out the effect of bond issues; deflation has ended; and unemployment has eased a bit.
Whom, or what, do we thank for this? Is it because of, or in spite of, the government?
Much of the driving force has been external - the momentum of the global economy and, within that, more particularly, the mainland. Another factor is, of course, the continuing basic energy and enterprise of Hong Kong's people and businesses. Successive administrations may deservedly claim some credit for that, through policies of low taxation, good physical and regulatory infrastructure, small government, and so on. In that context, the portrayal by the financial secretary, in this year's Budget speech, of government as the facilitator, not the leader, was potentially heartening. But that pithy slogan disguises some wrinkles. Where exactly does one draw the line between facilitation, and interference or plain dirigisme?
That question is especially relevant when one considers such initiatives as Cyberport, Disneyland, the science and technology park, a possible logistics centre and, of course, the West Kowloon cultural hub. What has been or will be the contribution of these to Hong Kong's overall well-being? They all cost the taxpayer money, notwithstanding that the cost may be disguised as revenue forgone, rather than being more visible as cheques actually written. Might those sums be better spent on, for instance, smaller class sizes in schools, in order to secure the human capital to keep Hong Kong moving forward in the years ahead?
In similar vein, one might inquire what benefits have actually flowed from the steady tide of collaborative initiatives with mainland bodies. The consensus seems to be that much of this is rather vacuous. The exception is perhaps the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement, which has been instrumental in giving some Hong Kong firms a head start in the mainland market, before other nations gain equal access under World Trade Organisation rules. Another concrete result, albeit a mixed blessing, is the flood of mainland visitors.
Overall, however, it would stretch the limits of chauvinism to accord officials, whether in Lower Albert Road, Guangzhou or Beijing, anything more than a minor credit for Hong Kong's recent economic performance. The economy continues to exhibit the inherent dynamism that has been its hallmark for decades, swept along now by an even more dynamic neighbour. In that sense, the government may take some credit for remaining passive.
However, the distinction between facilitating and leading appears as little more than semantics when considering potential giga-projects such as the Zhuhai bridge. This will necessitate substantial government involvement. Judging from recent events, it may need to be ready for opposition from almost any quarter.
But projects of that scale are the exception more than the rule. The seasonal wish among most of Hong Kong's business community would surely be that the administration should continue to facilitate prosperity, but definitely resist the urge to mastermind it.
Tony Latter is a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong
