Advertisement
Carrie Lam
Opinion
Alice Wu

From hope to despair: how Carrie Lam’s governance is putting ‘one country, two systems’ at risk

  • If plummeting public confidence in the government translates into an electoral defeat for the pro-establishment camp, it may set alarm bells ringing for Beijing, putting at risk the city’s high degree of autonomy

Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam meets the media in Tamar before an Executive Council meeting. Photo: K. Y. Cheng
For a chief executive who sold her electors and Beijing on her “vision” for a “Hong Kong of hope and happiness” in her election manifesto and who claimed, in her most recent policy address, that all her policies “serve just one purpose: rekindling hope for Hong Kong”, it must have been disheartening to learn of the results of the latest trust and confidence indicators, released by the University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme. There’s no way of sugarcoating the latest survey results: they are bad.

So bad, in fact, that some of the most significant indicators are worse than they were in 2003. And, given that 2003 was Hong Kong’s first political watershed since its establishment as a special administrative region, it is something that Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor really should be losing sleep over. Hongkongers’ trust in their government dropped 19 percentage points from just two months ago, to reach a new low of minus 12 points. Our confidence in the city’s future is at its lowest level in history.

Lam’s efforts at “Rekindling Hope” have not borne fruit; instead, the last few months have made more Hongkongers despair of a better tomorrow. There were, of course, many factors that culminated in the July 1, 2003 mass demonstrations. At the time, the government tried to bulldoze through national security legislation to fulfil our constitutional obligations as stipulated in Article 23 of the Basic Law.
Advertisement

The Tung Chee-hwa administration tried to do so while Hong Kong was both embattled in and mourning the effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars). At the height of shared public anguish and hopelessness, those efforts to force legislation through ended in absolute failure, and spectacularly so, getting half a million of what others have long called “politically apathetic” everyday Hongkongers onto the streets. The fallout changed the course of Hong Kong politics.

At the end of the day, the Tung administration’s failure to feel, interpret and react to the public pulse was its undoing. Sars was bad luck. The property market crash was unfortunate. By the time we consider how it mishandled the public health crisis, its refusal to appease public feelings and its insistence on moving forward with the national security bill, regardless of public angst and distrust, we should pause and consider how dangerously close Lam is steering her ship towards a similar political storm.

Advertisement
A scene from the mass rally at Causeway Bay against Article 23 legislation on July 1, 2003. Photo: Jonathan Wong
A scene from the mass rally at Causeway Bay against Article 23 legislation on July 1, 2003. Photo: Jonathan Wong
Advertisement
Select Voice
Choose your listening speed
Get through articles 2x faster
1.25x
250 WPM
Slow
Average
Fast
1.25x