**************************************************
Following is the speech (English only) by the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mrs Anson Chan, at the British Chamber of Commerce luncheon today (Thursday)ĄG
Mr Koo, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
Firstly, Irving, thank you very much for your very warm welcome and the kind introduction.
Secondly, I'd like to say what a pleasure it is to be with you here today. I say that with more than a twinge of guilt, because it is getting on towards 5 years since I last had the honour of addressing your members. But, I can assure you that I have watched your development and growth in that time into one of the most lively and innovative of our international chambers. Your presence in Hong Kong in such strength is important both in substantive and symbolic terms. We appreciate that the views you express on issues affecting your members are based on a deep reservoir of experience in, and goodwill for Hong Kong. That is why we listen to them so attentively.
And I hope you will have seen the evidence of that in the third annual policy address delivered just over a week ago by the Chief Executive. The emphasis that he placed on positioning Hong Kong as Asia's world city in the 21st century, and the all-out assault he launched on our environmental problems as part of that ambition, reflect in no small measure the constructive ideas and proposals that your chamber and others in the international business community have put to us, in particular since the transition.
I know that there may be some of you who would say that we are still not moving quickly enough, but I can assure you that our commitment to realising our dream of becoming the premier international city of this region is deep-seated and strategically underpinned. The international business community will have a key role to play in this, not least British business whose involvement and investment in Hong Kong has in no way been diminished by the reversion of sovereignty on 1 July 1997. And I hope you feel as much a part of our community as you ever did.
I know that you share our vision of Hong Kong's future, and want to be part of it. I was certainly heartened to see the acknowledgement in the Financial Times, in commenting on Mr Tung's speech, that "Hong Kong is becoming one of the first places to learn that a clear environment is now a necessary condition for places that want to attract inward investment in the service-oriented, knowledge-based industries of the future". That's a lesson that you have helped us to learn.
At this point I would like to spend a few minutes talking about environmental issues, and our plans to tackle them. Your timely warnings, as I have noted, that our less than perfect environment may make it increasingly difficult to attract foreign investment and new overseas companies to establish here have, I think, largely been heeded. Of course, everyone of us would like to see improvements happening overnight. So, to some, the five-year time frame may appear to be too conservative. However, through the efforts of a joint partnership with the entire Hong Kong community, from government and businesses through to the newest arrival from the Mainland, we should begin to see the evidence of cleaner air and a better quality environment filtering through before 2005.
This will become even more pronounced as a result of increased cross-boundary co-operation between the Hong Kong and Guangdong governments, particularly the establishment of a new Joint Working Group on Sustainable Development and Environmental Protection. Effectively tackling pollution problems in Hong Kong can only be achieved if there is a co-ordinated approach, and working together on regional air quality, studying the feasibility of adopting common standards on the use of diesel fuels, co-operating on forestry conservation, strengthening co-operation on controlling the pollution of Dongjiang, and keeping a close watch on the environmental impact of town planning and development.
And this is how we will reduce cross-boundary problems on the environment front. The fact that we have been able to secure this new agreement is largely attributable to the close and harmonious working relationships we now have with the Guangdong authorities. They are as anxious and concerned as we are to protect the environment.
The overall programme to clean up our act, as it were, will not come cheaply. Although we have already seen a price tag of $30 billion, there is one thing we can be sure about and that is that the cost to the community for not proceeding down this environmental path will be far, far greater. For example, every year thousands of people are admitted to hospital with cardiovascular diseases caused by air pollution. The cost of this is put at $3.8 billion. Tens of thousands more are affected by asthma and other chronic respiratory problems.
However, by reducing particulate and other air pollutant levels to the targets set for 2005, we will cut hospital admissions by over 10,000 a year. That alone represents significant cost savings, but more importantly it means there will be far more healthier people in our community as a result.
A cleaner environment, of itself, will not of course turn Hong Kong into the world-class city that we are all working towards. Important though it is, there are other critical elements - a vibrant economy for one, and I'll touch on that later. An active arts and cultural scene with facilities like those in a major performance venue being planned on the West Kowloon Reclamation. We need our own West End or Broadway, just as we are creating our own SoHo to take its place alongside Lan Kwai Fong.
We also need a critical mass of well-educated people. On this latter issue, we obviously can do better. The Chief Executive has made it quite plain in his three policy addresses since the Handover that education is our top priority. And to further develop this, the Education Commission is getting on with its task to review our entire education system and produce recommendations that will result in the all-round development of our young people. I know that this Chamber is playing an active role in this.
I can't let this opportunity slip by without making reference to an issue that I hold dear to my heart - and one I know you, as an international chamber of commerce, are deeply concerned about : the decline in the English standards of our younger generation. It is vital, if Hong Kong is to become the London or New York of Asia, that we improve our English language skills. English must not be seen as part of the baggage of our colonial history. Rather it should be seen as a precious part of our heritage. English, after all, is the lingua franca of the business world. Hong Kong means business. But what does that mean if our English standards slip?
As a government, we are continuing to improve the quality of our English teachers and the method of instruction in the schools to ensure that students master basic language skills at an early stage. And this is beginning to pay off. And we're doing it in tandem with efforts to improve our Chinese language skills, something we have been doing since the 1980s with our policy of promoting Chinese as the medium of instruction in public sector secondary schools. Our move last year to require junior secondary level schools to use Chinese (if they cannot teach effectively in English) is also bearing fruit with initial observations indicating that teaching and learning in these classes has become more effective, more lively and interactive. So we are beginning to make gains on both fronts. As you are aware, to a large extent, Hong Kong's competitiveness in the future depends on a workforce that has effective communication skills in both English and Chinese.
I think we need to face squarely the fact that the commitment to the learning of English on the Mainland has produced some truly impressive results over recent years. The standards of English of some Mainland graduates and post-graduates is high because they realise in China that this is the key to the global market place. Our own younger generation needs to understand how much it is in their interests to be fluently bi-lingual. They need also to recognise the in-built advantage that our education system offers : surely within their lifetime Chinese and English will become the world's two most widely used languages.
This seems the right moment to mention how delighted we are to be joining hands with the business community next year to launch a Hong Kong-wide publicity campaign promoting the use of English in the work place and in the community at large.
We're not alone in this. I notice the Singapore government is also starting a campaign next year to try to eliminate the widespread use of what it has dubbed "Singlish". One problem faced by my colleagues in the public service is the dwindling opportunity to communicate with each other in English. We simply do not, as opposed to Singapore, have a natural environment in which to converse in English - not just in the work place, but socially and at home.
So, this should be a spur to all of us here to re-double our efforts to maintain our competitive edge. But it may also act as a positive factor in moves to expand our economic base into a high-tech, higher value-added content and to attract talented people from other areas of China and, indeed, from other countries. In bringing people in from the Mainland they will be those who excel in their own fields and who have the necessary technological skills and experience that is currently not available here or not available in sufficient numbers. It is only natural that we should tap into this huge pool of expertise across the boundary. After all, we are part of the same country, but we will not be doing it at the expense of our own workforce. The idea is to stimulate job growth, not to break local rice bowls.
Let me assure you that our plans, which will be spelled out in detail on Saturday by the Secretary for Security, do not in any way affect our long-standing policy of welcoming talent from all over the world. Indeed, the most up to date figures for this year show that our approval rate for work visa applications has topped 83% and with the refusal rate at a post-transition low of 5.9%. Further, more than 90% of such visa applications are being processed within 6 weeks of the receipt of the necessary documents.
Hong Kong has always managed to attract talent from overseas. Our liberal immigration policy, the way that we do business here, our excellent infrastructure, world-class services set-up, our stimulating cross-cultural lifestyle and our geographical position, among other things, have invariably seduced the best talent from the four corners of the globe. And the inter-action this stimulates with our own talented and motivated people has helped drive Hong Kong to what it is today - a hard-working, lively, energetic city that, despite the problems caused by the Asian financial crisis, has remained one of the world's leading financial and business centres.
The strength of the foreign business community here has always been a measure of our reputation as an international city. On the one hand, we look to you for advice in keeping our policies business friendly. On the other, we look to you for leadership in maintaining business standards.
This brings me to an issue that is causing us some concern. I refer to recent reports which I am sure you have all read about : shoddy work - and its causes - in our construction industry. A recent ICAC review of practices in the industry has shown that the relationship between site supervisors and construction workers is far too close. The review pointed to one case where a member of a consultancy firm responsible for certain construction works was also freelancing for the building contractor involved. Frankly, this is simply not on.
The study also revealed that the links between some supervisors and contractors had moved beyond the ordinary 'working relationship', where they not only worked together, but also socialised and gambled together. Even though this might not be strictly speaking, a conflict of interest, it made it difficult for the parties to be scrupulously fair in discharging their duties.
Clearly, this type of corporate culture needs to be discouraged. The ICAC believes, and I agree, that there needs to be a much stricter demarcation line drawn between supervisors and workers. There should be increased site supervision by management and structural engineers. The ICAC has a number of other suggestions which must be looked at very closely.
The Housing Authority Chairman has already announced that new proposals are being drawn up to improve the quality of public housing following the recent cases of faulty piling. I welcome this quick and concerned response. Indeed, as the government itself and the Housing Authority are the largest clients in Hong Kong of the construction industry, we will work closely with the Authority, and in consultation with the industry and its associated professionals, to see what is required to improve and maintain standards, and ensure discipline. It is our intention to produce measures to address these problems as a matter of priority.
I don't particularly wish to single out one industry, because I believe there is a wider point to be made here. In times of economic difficulty, the whole community has to tighten its belt. The professions are no exception, and it would be a mistake for any to assume that they can insulate themselves from the realities of the market place. At the same time, tightening belts must not be allowed to mean any loosening or lowering of standards. It does our reputation no good at all if we are seen to let standards slip. And, it does the professions' reputation no good if they give the appearance of caring more for the maintenance of fee levels set in times of plenty, as we have seen recently in a Housing Department tender exercise, than the preservation of professional standards and ethical conduct, which should be timeless.
Traditionally, our community has held the professions in high regard. The misdemeanours of individuals scandalise and, therefore, have a disproportionately negative impact on the public perception of the profession as a whole. We must remain competitive, but we cannot afford any decline in standards.
Many of your members are drawn from the professions. So I call on you and them to take up the challenge of insisting both on best business practices and the highest standards of professional ethics. To my mind this is an essential underpinning of the rule of law: that the professional institutions are vigilant in governing themselves, in setting standards, in identifying and disciplining any transgression, in striking off those who dishonour the majority, be it through venality or negligence.
In other ways, coping with the fallout from the Asian financial crisis and the host of other significant incidents we have encountered over the past two years or so hasn't been easy. The combined effects almost sapped the strength and will of many civil servants and placed new stresses and strains on a service that had come through the challenges of the transition and change of sovereignty. But, I am pleased to say that the worst now seems to be behind us.
Our gradual climb from the depths of the worst recession in living memory is a tribute to the resilience of Hong Kong and its people, and, I think also, to the dedication, hard work and professionalism of the civil service in times of crisis. I know it's early days yet, but with predictions of a growth of two per cent in our economy in the second half of this year, we should be able to meet the Financial Secretary's budget forecast of a year-end growth of 0.5 per cent. Measured against last year's negative growth of 5.1 per cent, that is a significant turnaround in our fortunes.
But in a world of constant motion, we cannot allow ourselves to stand still. We are meeting the challenges thrown up by the Asian financial crisis and the IT revolution by reforming and readjusting our economy. By strengthening our linked exchange rate mechanism; merging and demutualising the stock and futures exchanges and their clearing houses; further deregulating the banking industry; introducing new technology and new products to the markets; and in providing increased powers to the Securities and Futures Commission, we are putting in place reforms that will ensure Hong Kong remains ahead of our competitors.
In other words, not only are we securing our future, we are refining our services infrastructure to make Hong Kong even more business-friendly for international companies to set up here. And, following the Chief Executive's policy address, making Hong Kong a better place for people to live and work. There is no question, the international community plays a vital role in our economic, social and cultural development. Without you, and your support and encouragement, we could quite easily become just another major city in China.
Because while we are very much a part of China, and are proud of the fact, we must retain and protect our own special characteristics. After all, "one country, two systems" means exactly that - not, one country one system or one country one and a bit systems. The Central Government has been scrupulous in adhering to its hands off approach to Hong Kong - allowing us free rein to get on with the job of running Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy laid down in our constitution. I know there are some in the community and outside Hong Kong, who believe that there has been a gradual dilution of our freedoms, our way of life and our commitment to the rule of law. I strongly disagree with this view. The Administration remains firmly committed to upholding the rule of law and protecting our way of life.
There are others, I know, who point to what they see as serious flaws in our constitutional arrangements which, they claim, eat away at the process of good governance. All I will say is that : our constitution is by no means perfect. Life is not always easy for an executive-led government which does not have a single vote in the legislature to which it is accountable. That means Government officials have to spend a huge amount of time explaining, persuading, lobbying often skeptical legislators about our proposals and decisions. This can be enormously time consuming and occasionally frustrating. But the upside is that having debated and discussed our proposals, sometimes to a standstill, the end result is one in which the public can be confident has been exhaustively tested in the court of public opinion. That adds to their credibility and, hopefully, their acceptability.
Our constitution is not, however, a dead end document. The Basic Law clearly lays down a timetable for constitutional change and the opportunity of reform. Our Special Administrative Region is only two and a half years old. We are on a steep learning curve, and my own view is that arriving at a community consensus on the most appropriate and workable arrangements for harmonious government is one of the most important decisions we will need to take in the coming years. That means a lot of give and take on all sides of the argument. The key to a successful conclusion is to fix as our common objective the preservation and protection of the high degree of autonomy we enjoy under "One Country Two Systems". That has always been the key to Hong Kong's future, and the experience of the last two and a half years has unmistakably underlined that. This crucial point must remain our guiding light.
Ladies and gentlemen, I realised that I have taken up a great deal of your time. I know that some members may have questions which I will do my very best to answer. On that note, may I end this address.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
End/Thursday, October 14, 1999
NNNN