*********************************************************
Following is the speech by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mrs Anson Chan, at the Heritage Foundation 25th Anniversary Dinner this (Wednesday) evening:
Dr Feulner, Ursula and Ed Meese, ladies and gentlemen,
Firstly, Dr Feulner, may I thank you for those remarks, they were as gracious as ever. For my part, on behalf of the Special Administrative Region Government, let me say that the Heritage Foundation does this community great honour by choosing Hong Kong as the only venue outside of the United States to celebrate your 25th Anniversary lecture series.
I think that entitles me to welcome the Heritage Foundation to its second home. Indeed, I hope you see it as your spiritual home. We like to think that your decision to open the Foundation's Asia Office here back in January, 1996 owed just a little something to that.
I would certainly like to assure you that there will always be a warm welcome in Hong Kong for the ideas and values and the spirit of enterprise that epitomise the philosophy of the Heritage Foundation and its admirers and supporters. President Reagan once described you as "the feisty new kid on the conservative block". Well, the kid has grown up fast, and your friends and foe agree on one thing : you are sure still feisty.
Before I say more, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Ursula and Ed Meese to our city. Our guest lecturer has had an awesome career in government, politics, education, the law and public policy making. His long association with Ronald Reagan both in California and Washington DC speak eloquently of his achievements. We look forward with great anticipation to your lecture, Mr Meese.
The subject of the lecture is Freedom. This is a matter close to the hearts of Hong Kong people. We know that freedom is not easily won, and needs to be guarded vigilantly to be preserved. That's another way of saying that we know the price of liberty.
All countries and communities are shaped by their history, and while ours in Hong Kong has been different from most, and in so many ways more uniquely challenging and demanding, it remains true that what we aspire to for our future owes everything to the way our society has developed in the past.
That is especially so of the Hong Kong of the post-war years, when we emerged from the wreckage of the Second World War to forge a new identity and give heart and soul to a string of islands and a speck of the Mainland of China. From this unpromising start, with nothing much at our disposal but a magnificent port and a determination to succeed, people came from all parts of China - and, indeed, from many parts of the world - to create the Hong Kong of today. We have done that on the basis of the fundamentals which are at the heart of the Heritage Foundation ideal: freedom, opportunity and civil society.
Freedom has been the core of our success. The freedom of men and women to go about their business without let or hindrance to make choices for themselves and their families. Freedom from arbitrary or interfering government. Freedom that promotes opportunity. Not just economic and commercial opportunity, but the opportunity to develop personally, socially, culturally and spiritually in a society that values hard work, tolerance, respect for the family and for each other. This is the way of civil society which embraces the rule of law, freedom of expression and assembly and worship, open and vigorous political debate, a free press, churches, charities, think tanks, trade unions, non-government organisations - the diverse riches of pluralism.
Perhaps most remarkable is that all of this - and much, much more - is enshrined in our constitution, the Basic Law, which was drawn up by citizens of Hong Kong and Mainland officials tasked with putting flesh on the bones of Deng Xiaoping's extraordinary vision of One Country, Two Systems.
It is now nearly 21 months since that concept became a reality for the people of Hong Kong and China. Dr Feulner, Mr Meese, I think I can safely tell you that we have seen the future, and it works. There is simply no gainsaying the fact that the transition has been a success, and that the problems we have encountered since July 1, 1997 have much to do with the Asian financial turmoil and very little to do with the change of sovereignty.
That's not to say that the transitional radar screen has been blip-free. It hasn't. I refer in particular to the recent controversy over a decision by our Court of Final Appeal on the Hong Kong residency rights of Mainland children which raised questions and concerns here and in the Mainland. We decided that the best way to answer those questions - and to defuse a potential constitutional crisis - was to ask the Court of Final Appeal to clarify certain parts of its judgment. It did so within its inherent jurisdiction. Our judicial system remains fully independent.
I do not wish to re-open this particular debate. I just want to emphasise that the public discussion which that issue aroused went to show, not for the first time in the short life of the SAR, that Hong Kong people are acutely mindful of, and sensitive to any moves they believe may impinge on our autonomy or impact on the rule of law. To me, that is a healthy sign that our citizens know what makes this place tick.
I think it also shows that we realise that in a free society problems won't go away by brushing them under the carpet, or by not mentioning them in polite company.
We in the government understand our fellow citizens' concerns for the rule of law. I have made it clear that we do not regard the rule of law as a cliche or a slogan to be trotted out to pacify passions at times of political controversy. We know what the alternative is to the rule of law. We are wholeheartedly committed to upholding the rule of law not simply because we know it is the imperative thing to do, but because we are constitutionally obliged to do so by the Basic Law.
In doing so, we must not lose sight of the fact that our sovereign has a legitimate role in seeing that the Basic Law is properly applied. And given the wholly different nature of our economic-socio-political and legal systems, this is bound to lead on occasion to misunderstanding and even tension or friction. I believe the recent episode has shown that when this does arise, matters can be satisfactorily resolved through frank but friendly dialogue, common sense and goodwill. That is, after all, what One Country, Two Systems is all about.
It has been a tumultuous but nonetheless exciting 21 months for the SAR. The regional financial crisis has caused hardship for our community, but we remain in good heart. We believe we may be over the worst, and we are determined to take advantage of the recession to introduce lasting reform and change that will position Hong Kong as a sharper competitive force when the Asian economy regathers its strength, as it surely will. The financial crisis has sent a wake up call to all of us in the region.
Let me point to just a few of the things we are doing. We are undertaking far-reaching liberalisation, restructuring and technological upgrading of our securities and futures markets. We plan to strengthen the supervision of the banking sector so that it adopts a more "risk based" approach, whilst at the same time pursuing innovations that will make our banks even more competitive and market friendly. We want to develop our bond market because we are convinced that the region as a whole needs more stable and flexible financing for local businesses.
We have some exciting proposals to reinvigorate our tourism industry. We have set in motion the process of reforming our civil service to make it leaner, more cost-effective, better focussed and even more service-oriented and client conscious.
We have gone into a joint venture to develop a $13 billion Cyberport to make sure that we surf the wave sweeping us towards the knowledge-based economy on which we have clearly and firmly set our sights. We in Hong Kong have never been slow to spot changes and opportunities, and in this rapidly-moving world, we more than ever need that fleetness of foot.
I do however want to make it clear at this point that there will be no moving away from our underlying philosophy of small, non-interventionist government. We continue to see ourselves as a facilitator and supporter, not the one to pick winners. Some have taken our involvement in the Cyberport as a sign that we are becoming - dare I say it? - more Singaporean as the Financial Times put it. Not so.
As a government we have always been deeply involved in the provision of our essential infrastructure - roads, drainage, rail systems, port facilities, the airport. The world is moving on, and we are moving with it in terms of providing the infrastructure we need for the information-age from fibre optics to a Cyberport.
Finally, we intend to embark on fresh privatisation initiatives led by the sale of a substantial minority stake in our Mass Transit Railway Corporation to free up even further what the Heritage Foundation has recognised for the last 5 years as the world's freest economy.
We are also working out careful plans to divest ourselves of the great majority of the local equity holdings we were forced to acquire in wholly exceptional circumstances last year when our markets were artificially distorted. This will be done by an independent company using professional financial advisers with a mandate to dispose of the stocks in a way which does not distort or disrupt the market.
I hope I have been able to show that Hong Kong has not been paralysed by the Asian financial crisis. Rather, we have been energised by it. We may be the new kid on the Mainland block but, like the Heritage Foundation, we remain feisty.
Dr Feulner, ladies and gentlemen, let me once again express our delight in the commitment the Heritage Foundation has shown to Hong Kong by choosing us as the only non-US venue for your anniversary lecture series. President Reagan inspired a generation of Americans with his vision of "the light on the hill". I think you can rely on Hong Kong to continue to be your light in Asia.
Thank you very much.
END/Wednesday, March 17, 1999
NNNN