The Hong Kong government, long accustomed to deferring to the wishes of the business community, now finds itself hoist with its own petard over the race discrimination bill, which it has promised to introduce into the Legislative Council shortly. For one thing, the government, which is obligated under international covenants to legislate, dragged its heels for many years. Then, when it decided to test the water, it first surveyed the views of the business sector before finding out what others in the community thought. Three years ago, it took the plunge and announced it would draft legislation to make racial discrimination an offence. In February, it announced the legislation would be introduced 'shortly'. Now, it appears, there is going to be another delay, and again, it seems, this is to accommodate the business community. The irony is that the government decided to oblige the business sector by providing an exemption from the law for companies that offer so-called 'expatriate packages'. In a paper on the proposed bill, the administration explained why there would be such exceptions. 'Under the proposed bill,' the paper explained, 'it is unlawful for a person ['the discriminator'] to discriminate against another person in a protected area of activity [for example, employment] if on the grounds of the race of that other person, the discriminator treats that other person less favourably than the discriminator treats, or would treat, other persons.' The paper then says that companies will be granted exemptions so they can offer 'overseas terms' to certain employees. Such exceptions, the government argued, 'help to ensure that Hong Kong's position as an international financial and trade centre would not be affected'. It is incredible that after so many years of study and preparation, officials still do not understand the most fundamental issues relating to discrimination in general, and racial discrimination, in particular. Perhaps the government is affected by the colonial tradition. In the old days, British officials were granted privileged terms because they were British, while their Chinese counterparts were denied such terms because they were Chinese. Such a policy was essentially one of racial discrimination, especially since in those days, ethnic Chinese who carried British passports were denied these privileges because, despite their citizenship, they were still considered Chinese. Now, the international business chambers, acting virtually as one, have rejected the government's offer of an exemption from the new law. As David O'Rear, chief economist of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, has said, companies do not offer extra benefits to employees because of their race, but because 'that's what it takes to get them hired'. The government evidently does not understand that the purpose of such legislation is to assist those who are the victims of discrimination. Companies offer what is needed to get potential employees to accept job offers and to relocate to Hong Kong. This is done not on the basis of race, but because of a person's training, skills and background. If companies do discriminate purely on the basis of race, they should be prosecuted. They should not be offered any exemptions. While the government seeks to do special favours for the business community, it is ignoring a large segment of people who are the real victims of discrimination - mainland immigrants. In past years, the Home Affairs Bureau took the rather enlightened position that mainlanders, because of their different cultural and social background, do form a distinct group that suffers discrimination in Hong Kong. But now, apparently to be politically correct, the government has changed its mind and refuses to extend the security of the law to this group - precisely the ones in need of protection, not the leaders of international business. Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based writer and commentator
