Ordinary Gweilo

Phil has some interesting thoughts on the changing role of politicians in Hong Kong. The story is that a cross-party committee of legislators is concerned that the government has appointed a former civil servant as director of audit in spite of his lack of professional qualifications. After 29 years as a civil servant is he likely to be truly independent when he investigates the way the government spends money?

This follows on from the controversy about Michael Wong’s brief tenure as chairman of the Equal Opportunities Commission. Mr Wong decided to terminate Patrick Yu’s employment as Director of Operations before he had even taken up his post, apparently on the basis of an interview he gave to the South China Morning Post. Yu had been recruited by Wong’s predecessor at the EOC, and was highly regarded in Northern Ireland, where he was (and presumably still is) a member of the Human Rights Commission, which was established in March 1999 as part of the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement (see below).

What seems to have caused a problem is not that Patrick Yu demonstrated any lack of ability or competence, but rather that he was a bit too keen to use his position at the EOC to deal with racial discrimination. You might think was exactly what that organization was supposed to do, and why he had been recruited, but Wong’s predecessor, Anna Wu Hong-yuk was unpopular with the government because of her enthusiasm for taking action to enforce the anti-discrimination laws, and her contract was not renewed. Instead a retired judge with no known interest or involvement in the subject (Wong) was brought in as her replacement, apparently with the remit of giving the EOC a lower profile. His insensitive handling of this matter actually had the opposite effect, creating much greater interest in the EOC, and re-igniting the controversy that surrounded the government’s refusal to renew Wu’s contract!

The point here is that legislators, pressure groups, and the media are proving very effective at scruitinizing the actions of Tung Chee-Hwa’s government. Michael Wong was most indignant at the way that the newspapers pursued this issue so vigorously, but anyone in public life in North America or Europe would regard this as quite normal. Hong Kong most definitely has a free press, and the popularity of Apple Daily and Next magazine demonstrate that taking an independent line and criticising the Hong Kong and PRC governments doesn’t have to be bad for business. Sadly, the SCMP is not so bold.