A tough time to love | China Daily Asia Pacific
A tough time to love | China Daily Asia Pacific
By SL Luo
http://www.chinadailyapac.com
It’s no secret Hong Kong’s political climate has gone toxic. For all anyone can tell, it could get worse, should there come a time when Hong Kong’s shining political luminaries graduate from hurling small missiles across the chamber floor, to engage in the same, full-scale, gladiatorial pugilism that stamped Taiwan’s “Legislative Yuan” as the Wild West of modern day parliamentary institutions.
No one could have predicted the course Hong Kong’s political winds would set. Leung Chun-ying rode into power on high hopes for changes that would improve the lives of the city’s middle class and its working poor. He appeared to have found the ideal formula. Seeing that the community was highly concerned about the widening gap between the rich and the poor, Leung proposed a program of bold social reforms likely to hold wide appeal to those who felt they had become disenfranchised.
The incoming CE’s good intentions, however, proved to be no more than paving blocks for a freshly radicalized opposition that had set out its own road map to delay, obstruction and filibuster. To many observers the opposition strategy appeared to be intent on forcing political gridlock, in preparation for a full scale independence movement.
“Right from the start, our Chief Executive has come under siege and often held to ransom by anti-China forces. Now CY (Leung Chun-ying) has not even settled down yet and they want him to go. How can we ever progress?” queries Patrick Ko Tat-pun, with some heat. The editor-turned-political convenor is head of the fledgling pro-government organization, “the Voice of Loving Hong Kong.” Ko and nearly two dozen other pro-government activists formed the group last autumn with a mission to “save Hong Kong” from what they considered the willful, malicious crusade on the city’s institutions, its society, its economy, and even its future, all in an effort to discredit the SAR government and even the central government. Since then, membership has swelled to more than 800, fueled by a political climate that had turned progressively unfavorable during the final session of the outgoing LegCo in 2012. The opposition was emboldened after the bitter election battle from which CY Leung emerged as chief executive but which left unity among Hong Kong’s pro government camp in tatters. The city’s business elite had supported Henry Tang to become the CE and accepted Leung’s accession to power grudgingly. Leung badly needed public support if he were to carry out his grassroots oriented mandate and implement his promise to make Hong Kong a better place. But the opposition, when not obstructing Leung’s legislative agenda, attacked his character with relentless assaults on his integrity.
“We want a harmonious Hong Kong,” says Ko. “We don’t want to have some brushfire war here. If the opposition groups are seen to get away with what they’re doing now, our city will go down the drain. How can we then integrate social and cultural relations with the mainland?”
Ko doesn’t mind being called names by members of the opposition. He doesn’t have nice things to say about them either. “Soulless creatures,” he calls them. “Nuts.” Hardly knockout blows in the slugfest of hard-nosed political rhetoric. Ko’s zeal, however, is demonstrably real.
Ko believes the central government should take a tough stand and crack down on agitators bent on stirring up trouble by belittling their motherland and her institutions.
Asked which Asian political leader he admires most, Ko responds, without blinking, “Lee Kuan Yew” – the authoritarian, no nonsense founding father of Singapore and its former Prime Minister.
“Perhaps, our Chief Executive should take a leaf from Lee Kuan Yew, who has done so much for the people of Singapore through his leadership skills. He changed the complexion of Singapore and lifted his people’s living standards dramatically,” says Ko.
Patrick Ko’s curriculum vitae reveals an impressive history of success in business. He founded Shun Yan Paper Products Manufactory 34 years ago where he remains managing director. He still thinks of Shun Yan as his pet project. Ko was named as the first president of the Hong Kong Small & Medium Enterprises Alliance Association. He’s an executive member of the Hong Kong Sze Yap Commercial & Industrial Association and a director of the Shenzhen Overseas Friendship Organization.
For all his business acumen and credentials, Ko is a tough-minded product of Hong Kong’s working class, the group CY Leung depends upon for the support he needs to implement his agenda. Ko’s father was a chauffeur, his mother, a garment factory worker. Ko was their eldest son. He got his early education at the Christian Alliance College in Kowloon, then earned a diploma in textiles at Hong Kong Polytechnic.
Leung Chun-ying came to office having mapped out a careful restructuring of the administration and intended to confront head on Hong Kong’s most vexatious issue – housing. His election manifesto was tailored to address the city’s disaffected grass roots. The new Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau, in particular, was meant to alleviate the city’s long-term housing shortage and cut waiting times for public housing. It was one of the first “victims” when the opposition filibuster ran out the clock on the final session of the previous Legislative Council.
Hope that things would improve in September after the new Legislative Council was chosen vanished quickly. Conditions worsened as the opposition mobilized large-scale protests, denouncing plans to teach young people about the history and institutions of their own country as a plot to indoctrinate by brainwashing.
“It happened just after last year’s Legislative Council elections, and then came the furor over national education,” fumes Ko, recalling his sentiments at the time. “Watching those young students, whom I call Hong Kong’s ‘Black Guards’, taking to the streets to denounce national education was a sorry sight,” laments Ko.
“It’s they (the students) who have been brainwashed by the opposition. My patience snapped. I feel if Hong Kong people fail to stand up and back their government, we would be at a dead end. We must rally behind the government while many other people are keeping their arms folded.”
Ko cites Malaysia and Singapore, which have implemented national education into their education curriculums. “It’s not a bargaining shop,” says Ko. “It’s for the good of the nation.”
He remembers his own brief career as a temporary secondary school teacher after graduation from Hong Kong Polytechnic. He taught subjects outside the standard curriculum, including Chinese literature and history, two core subjects in the national education program that he considered important even then.
During his classes, he delivered a clear message : never be rebellious, no matter how ugly things get. “To affect social reform we don’t need weapons. We have to change the people’s mindset by educating them. If we can’t do that, we can’t change the warp and weft of society,” he argues.
“While I was at Hong Kong Polytechnic, I was already involved in student activism, explaining the history of the Diaoyu Islands to fellow students,” Ko recalls. For that, I was targeted by the (British) colonial government.
“That spurred my resolve to take on a bigger political role. My motto was: Know the motherland and care for society. I wanted to play a bigger part for my country,” Ko told China Daily.
While still in school, Ko’s political acumen landed him a job as editor of a monthly student journal. “The job kept me going for six years before I resigned and got some of my classmates to give me the financial support I needed to open the Shu Yan Bookstore. The company remains in business today as an enlarged paper products company.
In October, the month after the LegCo election, Ko’s irritation toward opposition obstructionism deepened. The chief executive’s Old Age Living Allowance scheme, a program to provide an income to the city’s needy seniors hit a roadblock, as opposition legislators demanded that the government put forward a universal retirement program instead. The opposition succeeded in delaying passage of the Old Age Living Allowance for more than a month. Initially, Ko did not rule out staging counter demonstrations in opposition to the anti government movement, if things got too far out of hand. He has stepped back since then, however, after concluding that radical actions by pro administration activists would embarrass the government and disrupt public life.
“We don’t want to take to the streets for nothing. We ought to look at the big picture and analyze what’s good for Hong Kong,” he says.
“What has happened in Hong Kong in the past 15 years – the disruptive anti-establishment, anti-social behavior by certain groups of people, including lawmakers -- is unacceptable and intolerable,” laments Ko.
CY Leung has re-established the Commission on Poverty to give succor to those 1.17 million people, one quarter of the city’s population who fall below the city’s unofficial poverty line. {Oxfam Hong Kong Poverty Report: Employment and Poverty in Hong Kong Families (2003-2012)}. He took decisive steps to address Hong Kong’s troublesome “housing issue” but his legislative agenda remained bogged down.
“We all should be a part of the central government as one big family to counter those evil forces. If we fail to correct the wrong mentality of our young students, future generations will suffer. We must educate our younger people as well as residents to distinguish between black and white, right and wrong.”
In the midst of the filibusters and public protests, the opposition continued to press personal attacks on the chief executive and other members of his administration. Many observers saw the orchestrated effort as a game of high stakes politics, meant to prevent Leung from keeping his campaign promises.
“To Hong Kong’s ‘Gang of Four’, my message to them is: If you have the guts, go to Beijing and vent your frustration.” Ko challenges opposition leaders. “Do you want to talk to Beijing? If you do, stay back and do it or else pack up and leave Hong Kong as you wish,” he says.
The VLHK chief also has blunt words for Hong Kong’s “rebel” lawmakers. “These people are working for their own political interests. What have they done for the people of Hong Kong so far, except to engage in filibustering, holding the LegCo for ransom and interfering in and holding up the government’s work.”
VLHK started with only 20 members last year, but the number has since grown to 800, with a dozen core members like Deputy Convenor Mei Li and Tommy Choi.
The movement’s target membership is 10,000 in the short term through intensive public relations and recruitment campaigns with the message that Hong Kong is for all to live in and love and not to be meddled with.
Core members like Mei Li shot into prominence in the 1980s, having played an active part in canvassing support for China’s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands and organizing anti-Japan protests and memorial services in connection with the Nanjing massacre.
“At present, what’s happening in Hong Kong is we’re seeing cancer being spread among the community in addition to an ‘anger virus’ which, if unchecked, will also spread easily,” says Li, who also acts as a PR volunteer and interpreter for VLHK.
“We must let Hong Kong people choose the options. If they like it, take it. If they don’t, express your views for Hong Kong’s good,” she says.
Li expressed outrage and pain over seeing young people being goaded into burning the national flag. “It’s poisonous and deplorable. If our young people do not understand how to love their country, they must learn more about China’s history and culture. Our aim is to educate them in this respect,” she says.
“We have this vital mission ahead of us. We want to encourage those young people, those who burned the national flag, to walk back again on the right path and not allow themselves to be misled by evil forces. It’s our aim to end such anti-social behavior,” adds Li.
According to the group, Internet fans have begun organizing “Love the mainland, Love Hong Kong” and “Support the HKSAR government” demonstrations, talks and public forums in the city, in addition to holding pro-national education discussions and meetings. “These have been well received,” says Li.
Li ruled out canvassing funds in support of VLHK’s activities, saying they would not want to spark talk that the group is backed by mainland-related agencies or individuals.
“However, we’ll also be setting up promotion networks in Guangdong Province to counter possible anti-China activities conducted there through religious groups by anti-Hong Kong and anti-Beijing forces,” says Li.
No one could have predicted the course Hong Kong’s political winds would set. Leung Chun-ying rode into power on high hopes for changes that would improve the lives of the city’s middle class and its working poor. He appeared to have found the ideal formula. Seeing that the community was highly concerned about the widening gap between the rich and the poor, Leung proposed a program of bold social reforms likely to hold wide appeal to those who felt they had become disenfranchised.
The incoming CE’s good intentions, however, proved to be no more than paving blocks for a freshly radicalized opposition that had set out its own road map to delay, obstruction and filibuster. To many observers the opposition strategy appeared to be intent on forcing political gridlock, in preparation for a full scale independence movement.
“Right from the start, our Chief Executive has come under siege and often held to ransom by anti-China forces. Now CY (Leung Chun-ying) has not even settled down yet and they want him to go. How can we ever progress?” queries Patrick Ko Tat-pun, with some heat. The editor-turned-political convenor is head of the fledgling pro-government organization, “the Voice of Loving Hong Kong.” Ko and nearly two dozen other pro-government activists formed the group last autumn with a mission to “save Hong Kong” from what they considered the willful, malicious crusade on the city’s institutions, its society, its economy, and even its future, all in an effort to discredit the SAR government and even the central government. Since then, membership has swelled to more than 800, fueled by a political climate that had turned progressively unfavorable during the final session of the outgoing LegCo in 2012. The opposition was emboldened after the bitter election battle from which CY Leung emerged as chief executive but which left unity among Hong Kong’s pro government camp in tatters. The city’s business elite had supported Henry Tang to become the CE and accepted Leung’s accession to power grudgingly. Leung badly needed public support if he were to carry out his grassroots oriented mandate and implement his promise to make Hong Kong a better place. But the opposition, when not obstructing Leung’s legislative agenda, attacked his character with relentless assaults on his integrity.
“We want a harmonious Hong Kong,” says Ko. “We don’t want to have some brushfire war here. If the opposition groups are seen to get away with what they’re doing now, our city will go down the drain. How can we then integrate social and cultural relations with the mainland?”
Ko doesn’t mind being called names by members of the opposition. He doesn’t have nice things to say about them either. “Soulless creatures,” he calls them. “Nuts.” Hardly knockout blows in the slugfest of hard-nosed political rhetoric. Ko’s zeal, however, is demonstrably real.
Ko believes the central government should take a tough stand and crack down on agitators bent on stirring up trouble by belittling their motherland and her institutions.
Asked which Asian political leader he admires most, Ko responds, without blinking, “Lee Kuan Yew” – the authoritarian, no nonsense founding father of Singapore and its former Prime Minister.
“Perhaps, our Chief Executive should take a leaf from Lee Kuan Yew, who has done so much for the people of Singapore through his leadership skills. He changed the complexion of Singapore and lifted his people’s living standards dramatically,” says Ko.
Patrick Ko’s curriculum vitae reveals an impressive history of success in business. He founded Shun Yan Paper Products Manufactory 34 years ago where he remains managing director. He still thinks of Shun Yan as his pet project. Ko was named as the first president of the Hong Kong Small & Medium Enterprises Alliance Association. He’s an executive member of the Hong Kong Sze Yap Commercial & Industrial Association and a director of the Shenzhen Overseas Friendship Organization.
For all his business acumen and credentials, Ko is a tough-minded product of Hong Kong’s working class, the group CY Leung depends upon for the support he needs to implement his agenda. Ko’s father was a chauffeur, his mother, a garment factory worker. Ko was their eldest son. He got his early education at the Christian Alliance College in Kowloon, then earned a diploma in textiles at Hong Kong Polytechnic.
Leung Chun-ying came to office having mapped out a careful restructuring of the administration and intended to confront head on Hong Kong’s most vexatious issue – housing. His election manifesto was tailored to address the city’s disaffected grass roots. The new Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau, in particular, was meant to alleviate the city’s long-term housing shortage and cut waiting times for public housing. It was one of the first “victims” when the opposition filibuster ran out the clock on the final session of the previous Legislative Council.
Hope that things would improve in September after the new Legislative Council was chosen vanished quickly. Conditions worsened as the opposition mobilized large-scale protests, denouncing plans to teach young people about the history and institutions of their own country as a plot to indoctrinate by brainwashing.
“It happened just after last year’s Legislative Council elections, and then came the furor over national education,” fumes Ko, recalling his sentiments at the time. “Watching those young students, whom I call Hong Kong’s ‘Black Guards’, taking to the streets to denounce national education was a sorry sight,” laments Ko.
“It’s they (the students) who have been brainwashed by the opposition. My patience snapped. I feel if Hong Kong people fail to stand up and back their government, we would be at a dead end. We must rally behind the government while many other people are keeping their arms folded.”
Ko cites Malaysia and Singapore, which have implemented national education into their education curriculums. “It’s not a bargaining shop,” says Ko. “It’s for the good of the nation.”
He remembers his own brief career as a temporary secondary school teacher after graduation from Hong Kong Polytechnic. He taught subjects outside the standard curriculum, including Chinese literature and history, two core subjects in the national education program that he considered important even then.
During his classes, he delivered a clear message : never be rebellious, no matter how ugly things get. “To affect social reform we don’t need weapons. We have to change the people’s mindset by educating them. If we can’t do that, we can’t change the warp and weft of society,” he argues.
“While I was at Hong Kong Polytechnic, I was already involved in student activism, explaining the history of the Diaoyu Islands to fellow students,” Ko recalls. For that, I was targeted by the (British) colonial government.
“That spurred my resolve to take on a bigger political role. My motto was: Know the motherland and care for society. I wanted to play a bigger part for my country,” Ko told China Daily.
While still in school, Ko’s political acumen landed him a job as editor of a monthly student journal. “The job kept me going for six years before I resigned and got some of my classmates to give me the financial support I needed to open the Shu Yan Bookstore. The company remains in business today as an enlarged paper products company.
In October, the month after the LegCo election, Ko’s irritation toward opposition obstructionism deepened. The chief executive’s Old Age Living Allowance scheme, a program to provide an income to the city’s needy seniors hit a roadblock, as opposition legislators demanded that the government put forward a universal retirement program instead. The opposition succeeded in delaying passage of the Old Age Living Allowance for more than a month. Initially, Ko did not rule out staging counter demonstrations in opposition to the anti government movement, if things got too far out of hand. He has stepped back since then, however, after concluding that radical actions by pro administration activists would embarrass the government and disrupt public life.
“We don’t want to take to the streets for nothing. We ought to look at the big picture and analyze what’s good for Hong Kong,” he says.
“What has happened in Hong Kong in the past 15 years – the disruptive anti-establishment, anti-social behavior by certain groups of people, including lawmakers -- is unacceptable and intolerable,” laments Ko.
CY Leung has re-established the Commission on Poverty to give succor to those 1.17 million people, one quarter of the city’s population who fall below the city’s unofficial poverty line. {Oxfam Hong Kong Poverty Report: Employment and Poverty in Hong Kong Families (2003-2012)}. He took decisive steps to address Hong Kong’s troublesome “housing issue” but his legislative agenda remained bogged down.
“We all should be a part of the central government as one big family to counter those evil forces. If we fail to correct the wrong mentality of our young students, future generations will suffer. We must educate our younger people as well as residents to distinguish between black and white, right and wrong.”
In the midst of the filibusters and public protests, the opposition continued to press personal attacks on the chief executive and other members of his administration. Many observers saw the orchestrated effort as a game of high stakes politics, meant to prevent Leung from keeping his campaign promises.
“To Hong Kong’s ‘Gang of Four’, my message to them is: If you have the guts, go to Beijing and vent your frustration.” Ko challenges opposition leaders. “Do you want to talk to Beijing? If you do, stay back and do it or else pack up and leave Hong Kong as you wish,” he says.
The VLHK chief also has blunt words for Hong Kong’s “rebel” lawmakers. “These people are working for their own political interests. What have they done for the people of Hong Kong so far, except to engage in filibustering, holding the LegCo for ransom and interfering in and holding up the government’s work.”
VLHK started with only 20 members last year, but the number has since grown to 800, with a dozen core members like Deputy Convenor Mei Li and Tommy Choi.
The movement’s target membership is 10,000 in the short term through intensive public relations and recruitment campaigns with the message that Hong Kong is for all to live in and love and not to be meddled with.
Core members like Mei Li shot into prominence in the 1980s, having played an active part in canvassing support for China’s sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands and organizing anti-Japan protests and memorial services in connection with the Nanjing massacre.
“At present, what’s happening in Hong Kong is we’re seeing cancer being spread among the community in addition to an ‘anger virus’ which, if unchecked, will also spread easily,” says Li, who also acts as a PR volunteer and interpreter for VLHK.
“We must let Hong Kong people choose the options. If they like it, take it. If they don’t, express your views for Hong Kong’s good,” she says.
Li expressed outrage and pain over seeing young people being goaded into burning the national flag. “It’s poisonous and deplorable. If our young people do not understand how to love their country, they must learn more about China’s history and culture. Our aim is to educate them in this respect,” she says.
“We have this vital mission ahead of us. We want to encourage those young people, those who burned the national flag, to walk back again on the right path and not allow themselves to be misled by evil forces. It’s our aim to end such anti-social behavior,” adds Li.
According to the group, Internet fans have begun organizing “Love the mainland, Love Hong Kong” and “Support the HKSAR government” demonstrations, talks and public forums in the city, in addition to holding pro-national education discussions and meetings. “These have been well received,” says Li.
Li ruled out canvassing funds in support of VLHK’s activities, saying they would not want to spark talk that the group is backed by mainland-related agencies or individuals.
“However, we’ll also be setting up promotion networks in Guangdong Province to counter possible anti-China activities conducted there through religious groups by anti-Hong Kong and anti-Beijing forces,” says Li.
0 則留言:
發佈留言
訂閱 發佈留言 [Atom]
<< 首頁