Donation approved - or not
Last Friday, the Legislative Council approved a HK$100 million government donation to official Ya'an earthquake relief efforts, despite concerns among the general public over misuse of the funds.
Hong Kong people have always been generous in donations to disaster relief efforts. Not only would the government take the lead in making official donations, usually there would also be fundraising efforts in the community. Such aid proposals would usually be passed smoothly, yet this time, the government faced much resistance when it announced its $100m-donation plan.
The problem lies in the widespread corruption in China. Every now and then we hear scandals involving cadres and their relatives, the most prominent one being Bo Xilai's downfall last year. People's distrust in the system was further fuelled by earlier reports that a school reconstructed using Hong Kong's donation after the Sichuan earthquake in 2008 was pulled down to make way for the construction of a few luxury mansions. Many feared that similar misuse of taxpayers' money would happen again.
Pan-democratic legislators suggested restriction on the use of the funds to relief agencies only and called for better monitoring mechanism. Some more radical ones even considered a filibuster in an attempt to stall the funding. Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, however, tried to persuade legislators to pass the proposal so that the relief funds could arrive in Sichuan as soon as possible, while commenting that 'misuse of donation was unavoidable'. Pro-establishment legislators added that 'blood is thicker than water' and questioned if the pan-democrats were discriminating against people in the mainland.
In the end all the amendments to restrict the donation from being used as salaries and entertainment fees were voted down and the controversial donation was approved in a 37-23 vote as the Government wished. But this is not the end of story.
Although the public opposition to the donation is mainly due to concerns over corruption of the Chinese cadres, to a certain extent it is undoubtedly also a demonstration of Hong Kong people's resentment of the mainland Chinese. Still the government decided to push forward the proposal at this time without listening to calls for better preventive measures against the misuse of funds. Not only does this further harm the government's credibility, but it has also once again fanned the flames of the growing tensions between Hong Kong and the mainland.
While it is certainly unwise to add to the growing tensions, Carrie Lam's comment definitely made things worse. How could she encourage people to support the donation when she could not even persuade herself that the funds would be properly used for relief work? Although the government insisted they would ask the provincial government to provide a report on the reconstruction projects funded by the donation, they could have taken a more proactive role in ensuring appropriate use of taxpayers' money. Instead of direct donation to the provincial government, it might be a better option to inject the money to the Disaster Relief Fund and channel the money to reliable charities.
It is worth noting that a video clip showing legislator Wong Yuk-man's comments against the donation in the LegCo meeting became very popular in the mainland after it was uploaded to China's Youtube equivalent Youku. Surprisingly not only did it survive the Great Firewall, it was even mentioned in Global Times, a tabloid under the PRC's mouthpiece People's Daily. People's Daily published an article reflecting on Hong Kong's reluctance to donate to Sichuan as well. Charity groups in China were urged to increase their transparency and lower their administrative costs in order to regain trust.
Such unusual reports might suggest the determination of the Xi's leadership to tackle corruption. Together with the increasing use of Weibo among mainland Chinese to report government scandals, this could be seen as another signal to cadres that people are watching them. Let's see how the anti-corruption efforts will go under the new leadership.
Finally for Hong Kong citizens, the result of this vote should again provoke thoughts regarding Hong Kong's political situation. Are 'blood thicker than water' and emergency valid reasons to neglect rational considerations over the use of your money? How well does the LegCo represent the voices of people in society? To what extent do you approve of the current government's administration? What would you do to improve the situation?
Hong Kong people have always been generous in donations to disaster relief efforts. Not only would the government take the lead in making official donations, usually there would also be fundraising efforts in the community. Such aid proposals would usually be passed smoothly, yet this time, the government faced much resistance when it announced its $100m-donation plan.
The problem lies in the widespread corruption in China. Every now and then we hear scandals involving cadres and their relatives, the most prominent one being Bo Xilai's downfall last year. People's distrust in the system was further fuelled by earlier reports that a school reconstructed using Hong Kong's donation after the Sichuan earthquake in 2008 was pulled down to make way for the construction of a few luxury mansions. Many feared that similar misuse of taxpayers' money would happen again.
Pan-democratic legislators suggested restriction on the use of the funds to relief agencies only and called for better monitoring mechanism. Some more radical ones even considered a filibuster in an attempt to stall the funding. Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, however, tried to persuade legislators to pass the proposal so that the relief funds could arrive in Sichuan as soon as possible, while commenting that 'misuse of donation was unavoidable'. Pro-establishment legislators added that 'blood is thicker than water' and questioned if the pan-democrats were discriminating against people in the mainland.
In the end all the amendments to restrict the donation from being used as salaries and entertainment fees were voted down and the controversial donation was approved in a 37-23 vote as the Government wished. But this is not the end of story.
Although the public opposition to the donation is mainly due to concerns over corruption of the Chinese cadres, to a certain extent it is undoubtedly also a demonstration of Hong Kong people's resentment of the mainland Chinese. Still the government decided to push forward the proposal at this time without listening to calls for better preventive measures against the misuse of funds. Not only does this further harm the government's credibility, but it has also once again fanned the flames of the growing tensions between Hong Kong and the mainland.
While it is certainly unwise to add to the growing tensions, Carrie Lam's comment definitely made things worse. How could she encourage people to support the donation when she could not even persuade herself that the funds would be properly used for relief work? Although the government insisted they would ask the provincial government to provide a report on the reconstruction projects funded by the donation, they could have taken a more proactive role in ensuring appropriate use of taxpayers' money. Instead of direct donation to the provincial government, it might be a better option to inject the money to the Disaster Relief Fund and channel the money to reliable charities.
It is worth noting that a video clip showing legislator Wong Yuk-man's comments against the donation in the LegCo meeting became very popular in the mainland after it was uploaded to China's Youtube equivalent Youku. Surprisingly not only did it survive the Great Firewall, it was even mentioned in Global Times, a tabloid under the PRC's mouthpiece People's Daily. People's Daily published an article reflecting on Hong Kong's reluctance to donate to Sichuan as well. Charity groups in China were urged to increase their transparency and lower their administrative costs in order to regain trust.
Such unusual reports might suggest the determination of the Xi's leadership to tackle corruption. Together with the increasing use of Weibo among mainland Chinese to report government scandals, this could be seen as another signal to cadres that people are watching them. Let's see how the anti-corruption efforts will go under the new leadership.
Finally for Hong Kong citizens, the result of this vote should again provoke thoughts regarding Hong Kong's political situation. Are 'blood thicker than water' and emergency valid reasons to neglect rational considerations over the use of your money? How well does the LegCo represent the voices of people in society? To what extent do you approve of the current government's administration? What would you do to improve the situation?
+-+Behind+the+Tiananmen+Terrorist+Attack.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment