2023-06-29 11:20:47
2023-06-29 18:47 Last Updated: 19:37
Former Secretary for Constitutional Affairs Shi Zuxiang passed away. When Shi Zuxiang served as the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs from 1991 to 1994, he directly participated in the affairs of the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group at that time, especially the arrangements for the constitutional development of Hong Kong.
I was in charge of covering relevant news back then, so I was very familiar with Shi Zuxiang. During the period, there were two scenes of discussion with him, which are still fresh in my memory.
One was at a high-end London restaurant that was running out of water.
Back then, the Sino-British Liaison Group often held meetings in London or Beijing, and I went to London more than ten times for interviews. Officials usually have more leisure time for meetings in other places, so I often ask Shi Zuxiang to have dinner to wind down. Once we met for dinner in a very high-end restaurant in London, and we sat down to realize that we were the only ones in the restaurant. I can’t help but sigh that it is an economic miracle that this restaurant can survive with such little business. Shi Zuxiang had a feeling at that time and said that as a government, the family must do a good job in the economy.
In the 1970s, the British Labor Party came to power and carried out nationalization policies, which triggered a large number of strikes. The news of strikes was endless, and the British economy fell into a trough. Until Mrs. Thatcher came to power in 1979, she reintroduced the free market policy and privatized a large number of industries. The British economy began to improve gradually, but the growth was still slow. Shi Zuxiang and I had dinner in 1991. Mrs. Thatcher had just stepped down. I still remember that Hong Kong’s per capita output value surpassed that of the United Kingdom in 1993. In this year, the British per capita output value dropped to 18,389 US dollars, while Hong Kong’s per capita output value jumped to 20,396. The U.S. dollar has surpassed Britain, the colonial master of Hong Kong.
I told Shi Zuxiang at the time: “You are the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs, and you are the main force in designing Hong Kong’s political system. You will hold elections, but you think that politicians must first improve the economy, which seems a bit contradictory.” Shi Zuxiang did not directly respond to my statement. Just faltering. My understanding at the time was that Hong Kong focused on economic development in the 1970s and 1980s, and the economy was thriving, while the two parties in the UK focused on politics, and years of infighting were wasting time.
The second scene is an argument over the Singaporean model over breakfast. In 1996, Shi Zuxiang left the government. I still keep in touch with him. He goes to the Happy Valley Shan Kwong Tao Jockey Club for a swim every morning. I often ask him to have breakfast at the Jockey Club Liuhua Lang restaurant. One of the discussions left a deep impression on me. At that time, I talked regarding the differences between the development models of Singapore and Hong Kong.
Shi Zuxiang is a firm believer in Hong Kong’s “positive non-intervention policy” and is not impressed with Singapore’s government-led development policy. Shi Zuxiang believes that government-led, officials often make mistakes in decision-making. For example, Singapore focuses on the development of the electronics industry, but this industry fluctuates greatly, and Singapore’s development is not very successful. Another example is Singapore’s investment in the construction of Suzhou Industrial Park in China. Although it has invested a lot resources, but with little success. He believes that Hong Kong’s economic system with independent investment by private enterprises will develop better.
My opinion is different from his. Take the mainland economy as an example. After the reform and opening up in 1978, under the leadership of the government, vigorous economic reforms have been made. The past 20 years have been fruitful, and the economy has begun to embark on the road of rapid growth. Therefore, the non-intervention policy of Hong Kong, the most classic free market, should not be overly praised.
Shi Zuxiang and I have different views, but we are just expressing our views. The debate is not fierce, it is just to stimulate thinking.
The year 2003 was a watershed year for the “Twin Cities Tale” of Hong Kong and Singapore in terms of per capita output value. In 2003, Hong Kong’s per capita output value was US$23,977, while Singapore’s per capita output value was US$23,730. Hong Kong was still slightly higher than Singapore’s, but then Singapore’s per capita output value began to surpass Hong Kong’s. After 2010, the gap became wider and wider. Shi Zuxiang criticized Singapore’s government-led industry policy back then, but it has since blossomed. On the contrary, Hong Kong is actively non-intervention policy and has gradually become a real estate-led industry. In particular, the lack of interest in the development of innovative industries has hindered long-term development.
Coupled with the fact that following the return of Hong Kong, more and more energy was spent on politics. 2003 was indeed a watershed, when there was a large demonstration once morest the Article 23 legislation. Since then, Hong Kong has further become a society where politics is in command. The Hong Kong media didn’t even mention the fact that Singapore’s per capita output value surpassed that of Hong Kong, which shows that Hong Kong people are no longer interested in economic development.
Recalling the discussion with Shi Zuxiang on these two scenes, there may be different opinions, but the consensus is that if a place only engages in politics and keeps internal friction, it will be difficult to achieve good results.
Lu Yongxiong
read more articles
1688071895
#question #active #nonintervention #politics #command #blog #post
