Hong Kong can't afford officials' neurotic prudence in public spending

"The sky is falling" is a famous catchphrase from an old folk tale. A young chick becomes convinced that disaster is imminent when an acorn falls on his head. Chicken Little, as he is known, persuades other creatures to panic with him quite unnecessarily.

The moral of the story is we should not exaggerate danger; rather, we should assess situations calmly, address them appropriately and generally face up to them with courage.

I sometimes wonder if the spirit of Chicken Little has not lingered rather too long in our community after the end of the colonial era.

For the entire century and a half of British administration of Hong Kong, there was a legitimate question mark over the territory's future. This feeling of uncertainty grew stronger after the second world war and the civil war in China.

The British were particularly keen not to lumber themselves with policies here that might possibly lead back to a drain on their country's own resources.

This spirit affected our city in a number of ways, particularly in the areas of social policy and public financing. It became an article of faith within the government that it should not take on ideas that would carry with them enduring financial implications. In short, one-off or capital expenditures were fine, recurrent commitments would be disastrous.

I am not trying to rewrite history here, or downplay the fact that prudent management of public finances has served Hong Kong well over the years and left us in an enviable position.