'HK Society' ↓

I was glad to join the democracy march yesterday with thousands of people, not only because it was a way to express myself, but also I saw and felt in the march the diversity and independent thinking that Hong Kong is losing gradually under the post-1997 governments.

I cannot tell you how much disappointment I have in the Hong Kong government headed by Chief Executive Donald Tsang. The latest saga is the appointment of deputy secretaries and political assistants under the so called “accountability” system. When the city is not pushing ahead with its democracy, our Chief Executive is pushing for this appointment accountability system. But when its people have no vote and no say in the government affairs, who are these officials accountable to? Of course not to us. And certainly to Mr Tsang, their boss, who appoints them.

Do you see the irony here? When the people here are demanding democracy, the government is going the opposite way, under the fancy word of “accountability’.

The appointments of deputy secretaries and political assistants have been under barrage of attacks by the wide local community for its lack of transparency and the showing of nepotism. What are these appointees’ responsibilities? How were they selected? Based on what criteria are they remunerated? The government has never been able to give us satisfactory answers. Not to mention that it did not come up with fuzzy answers until pressurized.

When the controversy has evolved to the detriment of his reputation, Mr Tsang came to the Legislative Council, urging the community to let the dust settle, so that the community can focus on the livelihood issues.

Give me a break! Does he know that we people want quality of life as well? We want clean air, clear sky and open space. We are not individuals just wanting to make a living and surviving on this planet. This government knows only to follow the talk of its boss in the mainland and is glaringly out of touch with the pulse of the city that it governs. That is why people here go to the democracy march year after year on 1 July, the Hong Kong back to China day.

The veteran Hong Kong journalist Ching Cheong was finally released by the China authority, on the eve of Chinese New Year, who had spent more than 1000 days in jail for allegedly spying for Taiwan. 

His family, the Hong Kong Journalists’ Association and many friends of his, had been trying different ways to secure his release since his detention, with the belief that he is innocent.

During those 1000 plus days, his father died. To lessen Ching’s misery, his family hid the sad news from him.

Upon his return to Hong Kong, Ching asked for his father, when he saw that all his family was there, except his father. Only then was he told of the passing of his father. His tears started to flow.

A 27-year-old PhD research student Ge Weiwei of Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) from Mainland China hanged himself on 11th this month in his dormitory. Before the suicide, he failed to pass the Qualification Examination for Doctors. It is also alleged that his supervisor had told Ge that he would leave Hong Kong for teaching in the United States, leaving Ge confused about his future.

It seems to be a fact that a great number of mainland students in Hong Kong, many of whom come here on scholarship, find it hard to fit into the Hong Kong society, partly because of the language barrier and a different living environment. The local universities don’t seem to give them much support. The death of Ge probably has revealed this. He probably would have not resorted to suicide if he had been given more care by his classmates, his teachers and his university.

At the same time, I am also shocked at the vulnerability of the new generation of young elites in China. Gu came to study in HKUST as a PhD student on outstanding academic results three years ago. He was the only child of a Chinese family in Jiangsu Province at the east coast. It is understandable how much pressure he would have if he failed to graduate with a doctorate degree. For sure, he would not be able to “face” his parents, since the whole family’s hope was pinned on him. And most likely he had never endured any hardship in life, given that he was the only (spoilt) child in the family. So when a bit of difficulty occurred, coupled with pressure, he simply collapsed and surrendered totally, even his own life.

The young generation of Mainland China is so different from the old generation who has had so much of hardships (and pain) in life through all those turbulent and dark years in the 20th century. One major difference is the lack of strong will and determination in the young. Is it the one child policy and comfort life made possible by a fast developing economy to blame?

Hong Kong is staging a political farce. The candidate of the Chief Executive of the Government, also the incumbent Chief Executive, Donald Tsang, will surely win in today’s election where only a privileged group of 800 people in the whole HK’s 7 million population can vote.

What is more, these 800 people are mainly pro-Beijing businessmen and professionals, mostly appointed or elected in their respective professional sectors. The so called “election” is blatantly a sham - the election’s result is known even before the campaign starts, and most of the people in the territory, including me, are not eligible to vote.

Ironically, Mr Tsang staged a rally on the eve of the Election Day, summoning some HK pop stars and outstanding athletes, among others, to the occasion. Given that these HK pop stars and athletes never discuss in public at length or shown any interest in politics or social issues, and neither any of them is civic or political activist, the rally became an awkward show where they used the language they were uncomfortable with, to sing swan songs to Mr Tsang.

And today, after the election result was announced, the TV showed throngs of people surrounding Mr Tsang, congratulating him on his success. What success is this when the “success” is pre-determined and not won?

I feel disgust. When lies and fakes are obvious lies and fakes, but taken to be truth, and when so many people are willing to be the accomplices of these lies and fakes, can you not feel disgust? 

Starting from 1 January 2007, parents of new born children in Germany are entitled to share 14 months of parental leave with two thirds of their net salary paid. The news reminded me of the dismal maternity leave Hong Kong mothers have.

While the mothers in Germany have maternity leave of up to 14 months, mothers in Hong Kong have a paltry 2.5 months only. And do take note that it is maternal leave, not parental leave, meaning that only mothers are entitled to the leave and father are not allowed to share in the leave.

While the dismal maternal leave is affecting many families, there is little voice raised against the system. Well, maybe once a year, women labour groups come out in protest but their voice is quickly submerged. It seems that people are not satisfied with the system but they accept it as it is because they don’t believe that they should/can change it.

Hong Kong is an advanced economy in Asia. But its labour protection is hardly mature and advanced. So are other advanced economies in Asia such as Taiwan - Taiwan has only 56 days of maternal leave. I wonder if an economy is still an advanced one when the government is so reluctant to give a better quality of life to its people, such as giving a generous parental leave to those becoming mothers and fathers.

IIt was 8am, and I was riding a bus to work. The noise belching out from the screen hanging in the front and middle of the bus compartment was so loud that even though I put on my ipod, the noise was still ”noise” and it was just unbearable, especially in the early morning when I would need some quiet time and a clear mind.

This screen is part of an entertainment broadcast system common on all Hong Kong buses. Special entertainment programmes are produced just for broadcasting on the bus through this system, along with many advertisements. All the bus companies benefit, of course, from such a device. So is the private company which conceives this idea and owns the service. Who to suffer? Those having to commute on the bus and who hate noise and stupid entertainment shows.

It is hard to imagine this would happen on the tubes of London, where many commuters are seen reading newspapers, books or magazines, and the flooding of noise from advertisements and stupid shows is certainly not to happen. People will protest.

Here in Hong Kong, we keep silent, and are submerged in the noise day and night, while the bus companies and the concerned parties continue to make handsome money from the “roadshow” - the noise system they name.

I filed a complaint to the bus company and the following day, the roadshow was on as usual, and loud as usual.  

The news that Margaret Chan, the former health director of Hong Kong, becomes the new director -general of World Health Organizaton(WHO) appalls me. For those living through the SARS and bird flu epidemics in Hong Kong, they know pretty well how competent Margarete Chan is and I am sure they all find, just like me, the fact that she is picked to head WHO is inconceivable and not justified.

Well, to some extent, it is not inconceivable - she is picked because china is campaigning hard on behalf of her and the other countries have to give “face” to China, a rising economic power on the world stage. That is real sad. Because an organization as important as WHO should be headed by one who has passion, integrity, capability and experiences, especially of dealing with developing countries. Margarat Chan doesn’t seem to me a person who possess any of the attributes.

She hided the truth from the public when dealing with bird flu and SARS crisis so as not to alarm the society; She refused to go to the orginating place of SARS to make inspections for fear of getting infected; she was slow in taking actions to stem an epidemic like SARS, resulting in many deaths; she has no experience in dealing with developing countries which desparately need to grapple with urgent health crisis such as AIDS. 

And my criticism is not alone -  she was even criticized in the government-commissioned reports reviewing the government handling of the SARS and Bird Flu crisis.

The irony is, she has no chance to be promoted to such an important international post if not for her poor performance in her HK government post and subsequently being transferred to work in WHO as head of a sub-section.  

The whole fanfare awakes me to a bare fact: the order of the day is politics - not about merit, justice or fairness. At the end of the day, the global players don’t care if the world will be better. They care only what is good for them.