During the two meetings with Hong Kong and Macao members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference National Committee and Hong Kong deputies of the National People’s Congress respectively on Sunday and Monday, Han Zheng, member of the Politburo Standing Committee of the Communist Party of China in charge of Hong Kong and Macao affairs, conveyed several powerful and clear messages on matters related to combating COVID-19 in Hong Kong. These messages must be taken seriously by both the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government and the Hong Kong community as they embody important implications not only for handling the coronavirus pandemic but also for Hong Kong’s governance and the practice of “one country, two systems”.
Several developments in Hong Kong lately constitute the backdrop to Han’s remarks.
First and foremost, the COVID-19 pandemic, which is running out of control in Hong Kong, is no longer just a local problem. Instead, it has fast escalated into a serious national challenge. The pandemic has rapidly spilled over into Shenzhen and other parts of southern China, complicating the already difficult work of the Chinese mainland in controlling the pandemic. Accordingly, the nation cannot avoid getting involved in putting an end to the pandemic in Hong Kong.
The support given to Hong Kong this time by Beijing will set another good example of Beijing-Hong Kong coming together, each using its resources and working with the other to bring an end to a mammoth pandemic bedeviling Hong Kong
Second, Hong Kong’s latest outbreak is not just a health issue. The deficiencies of the Hong Kong SAR government in tackling the pandemic, as witnessed in the rapid rise in the infection and death rates, and the extreme shortage in facilities and manpower in testing, tracking, isolating and treating the victims, have significantly engendered panic, anxieties and even anger among Hong Kong residents. Thus, a health issue has fast morphed into a social and political issue, eroding the authority of the SAR government, threatening Hong Kong’s political stability, dividing the community, and possibly providing an opportunity to the now-dormant external and internal hostile forces to incite disorder.
Third, the defects of governance in Hong Kong have been explicitly and unrelentingly exposed in the way the pandemic is handled in Hong Kong and by the government. During this gargantuan and unprecedented health crisis, the leadership, courage, determination, ability, commitment, foresight, preparedness and resources of the government have all been put to severe test and the result is far from encouraging. Centralized leadership and oversight, coordination among government departments, concerted actions between the government and the public bodies, cooperation between the public and private sectors in healthcare, collaboration between the government and the mainland authorities, and the integration of the work of the government and the community are all found to be halting and wanting, thus weakening the ability of the SAR government to effectively combat the pandemic.
Fourth, Hong Kong’s economy, which was hit hard by the political turmoil in 2019-20, has taken a heavy battering because of the protracted pandemic. The plight of the economy has been exacerbated by the closing of the borders between Hong Kong and the mainland. Hong Kong desperately needs to integrate into the country’s development to reinvigorate its economy, improve the livelihoods of the people and contribute to the country’s development. Lamentably, the closed borders have made it impossible. A continued economic downturn will without doubt aggravate the political and governance problems in Hong Kong.
Last but not least, the inability of Hong Kong to put an end to the pandemic will invite vicious doubts and criticisms about the viability of the “one country, two systems” project. If the pandemic cannot be eradicated within a reasonable period, the ability of Hong Kong people to administer Hong Kong will be called into question, undermining internal and external confidence in Hong Kong’s future.
Given the enormity at stake concerning the pandemic, not only for Hong Kong but also for the motherland, Beijing must make its stance loud and clear. In these circumstances, Han’s powerful and clear messages are necessary and timely.
On behalf of the Communist Party of China, the central authorities and the country, Han expresses sincere and deep solicitude for the health and well-being of Hong Kong people. He makes it crystal clear that Beijing will spare no efforts to pull Hong Kong out of the morass created by COVID-19. A lot of healthcare workers, material and facilities have already poured into Hong Kong to make up for its inadequate and strained resources. Beijing is going to provide more leadership, guidance and expertise to Hong Kong for the sake of putting the pandemic under control as soon as is practicable. The dispatching of a team of specialists led by Liang Wannian, leader of the National Health Commission’s Covid Response Expert Team, to Hong Kong underscores Beijing’s resolve to help Hong Kong to tide over the crisis. The assignment of Vice-Premier Sun Chunlan to take overall responsibility for ending Hong Kong’s pandemic and coordinate the assistance to Hong Kong by various mainland entities testifies to Beijing’s confidence in its capability to help Hong Kong out.
At the same time, Han emphasizes the crucial role of the SAR government as the main entity to fight the pandemic. Beijing understands the enormous difficulties encountered by the SAR government in coping with such a huge pandemic, but it still reckons that there is a lot of room for improvement on the part of the SAR government. Specifically, Han admonishes the SAR government to prioritize human life, public health and cutting down the death rate, to show empathy and concern for the suffering of the people, to strengthen top-level planning, coordination, and oversight within the government, and to make sure that all the government departments and personnel work in concert with each other to better deliver results, to listen carefully to the suggestions by Beijing and the mainland experts and to utilize effectively and in full the resources and assistance coming from Beijing and the mainland. From another point of view, Beijing clearly demands that the SAR government upgrades its performance and be accountable to the central government for its success or failure in coping with the pandemic. In effect, Beijing would like to take the opportunity presented by the pandemic to enhance Hong Kong’s governance. By telling the jittery Hong Kong public that they can bank on the support and care of the motherland, Han’s remarks and pledges will certainly be able to reassure the people, soothe panic, and enhance social stability.
Han is alert to the fact that in fighting the pandemic, too much reliance is placed on the Hong Kong government and the public hospitals and clinics, which are far from adequate for the task at hand. He accordingly pinpoints the cruciality of the private healthcare sector and the resources from the community, particularly from the patriotic camp, that can be mobilized and put to good use. Han recognizes that the healthcare sector of Hong Kong is lopsided and its resources very much misallocated. Whereas more than 90 percent of Hong Kong residents must depend on the public healthcare system for treatment and care, the resourceful private hospitals and doctors are quite underutilized because of the expenses to be borne by the clients. Han notes with dismay and disappointment that the private healthcare sector has been sluggish or even reluctant to play an active role in the war against the pandemic, including refusal to take care of COVID-19 victims, despite all the beneficial policies they have received from the government and their privileged status in the community. Accordingly, Han pleads with them to come forward and fulfill their “white-clothed mission” faithfully. The plea is bound to enable the Hong Kong government to come up with an administrative, policy or legal means to bring more private hospitals, clinics and healthcare workers on board to fight the pandemic. It is expected that in varying degrees, the different private sector entities will respond to the plea. The experience of public-private health sector cooperation thus garnered will help Hong Kong install a more effective healthcare model to cope with future large-scale pandemics.
Han’s suggestions and demands, when implemented successfully, will not corrode “one country, two systems” as suggested by some critics, but instead will enrich it substantially. The critics have a narrow and inaccurate view that only when Hong Kong can solve all its problems and has no need to call for assistance from Beijing would “one country, two systems” be called a success. This is a gross misunderstanding of the meaning of “one country, two systems”. Beijing has reiterated time and again that in Hong Kong’s governance, both Beijing’s “comprehensive jurisdiction” (quanmian guanzhiquan) and Hong Kong’s “high degree of autonomy” are at play. In other words, in the process of formulating the “one country, two systems” policy, Beijing has already envisaged a situation where Hong Kong cannot on its own tackle a major crisis and when the involvement of Beijing is imperative. That is the reason why Section 4 of Article 18 was inserted in the Basic Law. Beijing did come to the rescue of Hong Kong during the Asian financial crisis and the 2019-20 insurrection. Thus, joint efforts by Beijing and Hong Kong to surmount an enormous challenge are part and parcel of the successful practice of “one country, two systems”. The scale of the fifth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic is too huge for Hong Kong to tackle alone, even if the SAR government has not made any blunders, the involvement of Beijing is thus unavoidable. Accordingly, the support given to Hong Kong this time by Beijing will set another good example of Beijing-Hong Kong coming together, each using its resources and working with the other to bring an end to a mammoth pandemic bedeviling Hong Kong. The operation of “one country, two systems” in countering the pandemics consequently will be further enriched and made more effective.
The author is emeritus professor of sociology, the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Vice-president, Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.