In October 2019, the fourth plenum of the 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China decided that the effectiveness and capability of governance in accordance with law in Hong Kong had to be enhanced. Subsequently, Zhang Xiaoming, deputy director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, in explicating the decisions of the plenum, urged that the institutions ensuring that the chief executive of Hong Kong be accountable to the central authorities be strengthened, that the executive-led political system of Hong Kong be fully established, and that the civil service management system be reinforced.
Since the implementation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong and the drastic revamping of Hong Kong’s electoral system, Hong Kong has restored order and stability. The next important tasks are to fully execute the various decisions of the fourth plenum, and the immediate task undeniably is to enhance the effectiveness and capability of governance in Hong Kong. Only after this task has been accomplished can the leadership team led by the chief executive be fully accountable to the central authorities, the civil service be strongly commanded by the leadership team, and the decisions of both the central authorities and the Hong Kong government be faithfully implemented.
On the subject of strengthening the effectiveness and capability of governance in Hong Kong, I have the following preliminary suggestions on the institutional changes that must be made in the days ahead.
In the first place, the central authorities must strengthen their determination and ability to select, guide, assess, appoint/dismiss, liaise with, support and hold accountable the chief executive and the principal officials, making sure that the comprehensive jurisdiction of the central authorities and the high degree of autonomy of Hong Kong tie together seamlessly. This would enable the powers of the central authorities and the Hong Kong government to merge and together constitute a powerful “governing authority”. This powerful governing coalition is essential to successfully making, revamping, and executing those public policies that are desperately needed to resolve the deep-seated economic, social and livelihood problems in Hong Kong, notably land and housing shortages as well as staggering economic inequality.
Since the implementation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong and the drastic revamping of Hong Kong’s electoral system, Hong Kong has restored order and stability. The next important tasks are to fully execute the various decisions of the fourth plenum, and the immediate task undeniably is to enhance the effectiveness and capability of governance in Hong Kong
Secondly, the leadership team’s loyalty to the central authorities, commitment to Hong Kong, international perspective, national vision and historical outlook, political sensitivity and political courage must be bolstered, so must its solidarity, esprit de corps, combativeness and fighting ability. Cooperation between the leadership team and the patriotic forces in Hong Kong’s governance must increase. Both parties should have a sense of common political fate. The leadership team should have a mission to unite the patriotic forces and groom patriotic political leaders. In the past, the leadership team and patriotic forces belonged to two different “camps”, sometimes even at loggerheads with each other. This state of affairs should not be allowed in the future.
Thirdly, if the objectives of the “principal officials’ accountability system” and the principle of “executive-led government” are to be realized, not only is a solidary and capable leadership team indispensable, that team should also be able to effectively command the civil service. To make sure that the civil service is strongly led by the leadership team, the leadership team should be given a certain degree of influence in the promotion, dismissal and transfer of civil servants. At present, these crucial decisions are primarily in the hands of senior civil servants. One of the major criteria, but not the only criterion to be adopted in making such decisions, should be whether the civil servant concerned is able to faithfully execute the decisions and policies of the leadership team. Needless to say, meritocracy should continue to be the fine tradition and basic principle undergirding the integrity of the civil service. It is also important to prevent the appointment and promotion of senior civil servants from “over-politization”.
Fourthly, more statutory power should be given to the chief executive and the principal officials to obtain and allocate fiscal resources, particularly within the bureaux and departments under their charge. As of now, this statutory power is mostly in the hands of senior civil servants. A more fiscally empowered leadership team will bring about faster, more flexible and more effective implementation of the policies and decisions of the government.
Fifthly, with the “principal officials’ accountability system” in place, the chief executive and his/her principal officials should be fully in charge of and responsible for political and administrative leadership, as well as control of and coordinating the activities of the government bureaux and departments. During colonial times, these functions were performed by the governor and the administrative officers in the civil service. In the new political-constitutional context and in the new administrative structure, the importance of the administrative officers in performing those functions has declined continuously and irreversibly, so has their status and influence in the government. Since there will be incessant changes in the membership of the leadership team because the principal officials are political appointees, the administrative officers still have an important role to play in the sense of maintaining the overall functioning of the government, retaining its institutional memory and ensuring the continuity of many public policies. Administrative officers will continue to be assigned to those tasks with explicit and significant political content and implications.
Sixthly, the level of professionalization of the civil service should be increased. All along, most of the top positions in the government departments are occupied by “generalist” administrative officers. This arrangement is “rational” as long as the administrative officers are primarily in charge of running the government and their “monopoly” of top departmental positions can provide coherence and stability to governance. But with the rise of the politically appointed leadership team, this is no longer the case. Even though there is a certain division of labor between administrative officers in the economic/financial realms and other areas, the overall level of professionalization of the senior civil servants is still comparatively low. The problem is made more serious by the fact that an administrative officer normally occupies a top policymaking office for only a few years and there is not enough time for him/her to become a policy specialist.
Except for a minority of countries such as the United Kingdom, most advanced nations such as the United States, Germany, France and Japan have long-serving specialists and officials in the departments appointed as their department heads. Today and in the days ahead, Hong Kong will have to cope with a lot of complicated and tricky policy issues, pertaining to “Hong Kong merging into the country’s overall development”, economic development, upgrading and diversifying Hong Kong’s industrial structure, improvement of people’s livelihoods, technological advancement, etc. It is imperative that more specialist talent be recruited by the government and various statutory bodies to enrich and enlarge the “talent pool” of the government. In the future, it is desirable for senior civil servants in grades other than administrative officer to be promoted to top positions in various departments. At the same time, the government should consider attracting more professionals from the community to work for the government on a short-term or long-term basis, as either contract employees or civil servants.
Sixthly, the secretary for the civil service should strengthen its role as the top person of the leadership team in managing and commanding the civil service. He/she should not be seen by civil servants as playing the major role as their “representative” or “spokesperson” in the government. There is no need for the secretary for the civil service to come from the ranks of civil servants. He/she should bear the responsibility of ensuring the integrity of the civil service, ensuring that it abides by the national Constitution and the Basic Law, forestalling its politicization, maintaining its unity, boosting its morale and preventing it from becoming a battleground of rival political forces in the community.
Lastly, since the central authorities are serious about strengthening and perfecting the system of appointment/dismissal and accountability system for the chief executive and the principal officials, it is reasonable to apply similar rigorous assessment standards to the civil service. Many civil servants harbor the expectation that the rule of “only promotion and no demotion” prevails in the government, and it is rare for civil servants to get demoted or dismissed. Hence, to strengthen discipline and to increase the sense of responsibility in executing duties in the civil service, more skillful and stricter utilization of the reward-and-punishment mechanisms is needed to raise the sense of responsibility and improve the performance of civil servants.
The author is a professor emeritus of sociology, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and vice-president of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.