Today Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen completes the first year of his second term. But anyone thinking of consulting his election website to see how he is doing on campaign promises is in for a surprise. The Web address www.donald-tsang.com now offers speed dating, one-night stands and related services. According to a member of his former campaign team, Mr Tsang's website was taken off the day after he was elected because of cut-off rules for election expenses, and upon legal advice. The campaign site of his challenger, Alan Leong Kah-kit, is still online. The government view is that Mr Tsang's campaign platform has been transformed into his 2007 policy address. His spokesmen point to promises speedily kept, such as tax cuts and stricter food labelling, and to action on infrastructure projects, especially the long-proposed Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau bridge. They also cite important bills now before the Legislative Council, such as on race discrimination and the West Kowloon Cultural District, and to consultations under way for other issues such as minimum wage legislation, competition law and health-care financing reform. Political analysts see it differently. While allowing that Mr Tsang still has four more years, they say he has a governance style that harks back to the colonial-era ethos of 'least necessary change'. Michael DeGolyer, associate professor of government and international studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, described the colonial ethos - evident even during Mr Tsang's time as Sha Tin district officer in the early 1980s - as one of making no change unless necessary. 'It's the idea that a government is safest which does the least necessary to maintain control,' said Professor DeGolyer. 'So you want to make incremental change in the smallest increments that are possible, that are needed to keep the pressure off. You see that ethos in the government today.' He cited the 10 major projects announced in the last policy address, including the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge. 'This looks like a huge expenditure but when you look at the amount of money and the number of years across and what is delivered in that time for that money, it is less ambitious than the 1989 PADS initiative [for the Hong Kong International Airport]. 'It looks like big things but actually you're really only talking about swinging maybe seven to eight seats [in the Legislative Council] that have cemented a hard core of support that could prove critical to the government in getting its agenda through.' Professor DeGolyer said that when Mr Tsang took office in 2005, key components of government and its supporters were alienated and the administration was 'in disarray'. Mr Tsang had since cemented a nexus of support within the civil service, the community and allies in Legco. Mr Tsang had used both his 2005 and 2007 election campaigns to send 'policy signals', such as his belief in infrastructure projects and job-creating public works, while sending out the message that 'he knew who his friends were and that he had his priorities right regarding them', said Professor DeGolyer. 'His best play to ensure Liberal Party loyalty, which the government lost in a crucial moment in 2003, was to make sure that not only did they know on which side the bread was buttered but that they realised very clearly who was in control of the butter,' he said. Moreover, Mr Tsang had built a strong core to convey the notion of competence and commitment, and had also done a good job of controlling Legco and of keeping large groups of people from marching on the street, he said. The research director of SynergyNet think-tank, Ray Yep Kin-man, who is also a political scientist at City University, said the administration's incremental approach to change reflected 'a very cautious attitude' on Mr Tsang's part. 'I think he believes there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the status quo. When there is a strong rising concern about something, he will promise to look into it. But when special interests apply pressure or public opinion doesn't go his way he'll back down quite soon, such as with the food labelling issue and fiscal/tax reform,' Dr Yep said. He said it was disappointing that the chief executive's election promise to strengthen district administration had ended up with 'minor changes' and 'cosmetic measures'. 'Donald Tsang tried to prove his commitment by calling a district administration summit chaired by himself, but it was all style and no substance,' he said. 'My conspiracy theory is that he knows there is no strong demand or pressure for change so he can say 'mission accomplished' quite easily.' Dr Yep said it was only fair to wait and see what the government would do in other areas, such as direct elections, poverty, competition law and the future of public broadcasting. Meanwhile, he said, proposed action on the minimum wage had been confined to just two sectors - cleaners and security guards - while new mainland immigrants facing daily discrimination were not covered by the Race Discrimination Bill. The government wants to appear responsive, but realises it faces a bigger problem than it expected, said Dr Yep. 'So they take an easy way out by adopting or introducing very confined, narrow changes so as to make the public happy, and that's the end of the story. Although in their minds, they know there is a big problem that remains untouched.' Dr Yep said a year was not a short time in any administration and the hope was that more would be done, with less backing down, to ensure passage of initiatives the administration believed in, especially when Hong Kong's overall mood was good. He believed Mr Tsang had political capital he could spend to make basic changes in the long-term interests of Hong Kong. 'On many issues, especially the environment, the government should know that public opinion is on its side and it should make the best use of this opportunity.' Joseph Chan Cho-wai, of the University of Hong Kong's department of politics and public administration, said election platforms were forgotten even in western democracies. But he was surprised about the campaign website. 'You would at least expect to be able to access the main campaign material - Mr Tsang's declaration speech and his full policy platform, in particular - on the CE's office website or on the Election Commission site, but they are not there. It seems that history subtly is wiped out and I think that's scandalous,' said Professor Chan, who is also director of the university's centre for civil society and governance. He said a dutiful civil servant could not access the important documents. 'What he's got is only the policy address. But the policy address deviates significantly from the platform.' A glaring example, said Professor Chan, was Mr Tsang's election promise to revamp policy-making to make it more open and participatory. In his 2007 declaration speech as a candidate, Mr Tsang had said: 'I will encourage government officials to change their mindset from that of policy formulator to that of interest co-ordinator. They should encourage expression of public opinion, provide options, and balance the interests of stakeholders to ensure that decisions are pragmatic and in line with people-based principles.' In the policy address eight months later, he said: 'To strengthen interaction between the government and the community, I have asked the politically appointed officials of the third-term government to proactively reach out to the community, listen to public views and work with the stakeholders.' Professor Chan said this was neither a complete rethink nor a reform of the policy process and that Mr Tsang was merely asking political appointees to do what they were already doing. 'It doesn't involve the civil servants, it doesn't tell the ministers where to start going into the community or at what stage of the policy development process.' He speculated that the 'limiting' of public engagement reflected a lack of political self-confidence in Mr Tsang, his ministers and permanent secretaries, in the absence of a democratic mandate. 'There are a lot of activists in civil society, media and politicians who can easily get up and band together against them. They are very worried about opposition from different sources and sectors. So they try ... not to upset major stakeholders.' Democratic regimes, said Professor Chan, were able to integrate different interests. 'The election is precisely a type of engagement,' he said. 'That's why newly democratic administrations are often able to move things very fast, at least in the first two or three years. The Hong Kong government has none of this.' The ethos of waiting for pressure to build was encouraging extreme opposition, he said. 'You're inviting people to behave in such an adversarial way as to shock your system, otherwise you won't listen. But if you were to do it rationally and procedurally and engage them at the beginning, you won't need to let the system be shocked.'
