Value for money
Christine Loh (SCMP)
Aug 20, 2009
Of course, government handouts cannot continue. There have already been four rounds of giveaways, worth HK$87.6 billion, since last February. Government sources have reportedly said there won’t be any more in the chief executive’s policy address this October. Despite all the effort, the public continues to question whether money is being spent in the right places.
A big part of every Hong Kong stimulus plan during an economic downturn is to pump money into infrastructure projects. Indeed, a major part of government spending goes on building “hardware”, year after year. Hong Kong has successfully built industrial parks, airports, bridges and highways – but has not done so well on city planning, urban renewal, transport and traffic management, and environmental regulation.
Some will say that Hong Kong’s public transport is good because it provides variety at low cost. It is certainly relatively cheap and varied, compared with that in other developed cities. However, while our underground system is excellent, it is not nearly as extensive as in, say, Tokyo, Paris, London or New York; our bus fleet is old and highly polluting; minibuses are often not in good condition; better use could be made of trams as a less-polluting transport mode; and the government has been unable to deal with triads controlling taxi queuing in places like the airport.
Moreover, a look at how other cities are using information technology to manage traffic tells us something about where Hong Kong is found wanting.
In Seoul, for example, street cameras feed images back to a traffic command centre that enable parking and other traffic violations to be spotted so fines can be issued electronically and immediately. This system has proved to be a powerful deterrent. Singapore is another place that is using IT as the backbone of its traffic management system. For its part, Hong Kong could utilise mobile technology to monitor roadside pollution, one of our leading public health threats, so policymakers can adopt the most effective methods to improve air quality. Why are these and other modern-day measures not being implemented?
The government thinks of its role in terms of promoting specific industries such as logistics, finance, tourism and, more recently, green industries, but not in terms of how to develop and implement policies to ensure specific results. Policymakers could turn things round if they focused on societal benefits, such as better jobs, a cleaner environment, improved public health and more efficient transport management, which all lead to higher economic value.
With these goals in mind, how would Hong Kong upgrade its logistics sector, for example? It would require improvements to deliveries, fuel efficiency, safety, pollution reduction and occupational health. This would call for investment by the public sector in planning, regulation and infrastructure, and by the commercial sector to improve training and management.
The problem in Hong Kong may well be the strong link between the government’s habit of providing physical infrastructure in the belief that it is the most useful economic driver, and the interests of big business in maximising profits. Upgrading a sector to provide wider community benefits is not seen as an investment, but a cost that reduces profit. Resistance also comes from those in the public and private sectors who believe such upgrades challenge their jobs. Why else would Hong Kong not make IT a pillar to support all kinds of improved efficiency, management and communication?
Yet another way we can look at this is to ask how Hong Kong can upgrade the construction sector. Eliminating red tape is one way. Another is to upgrade the workforce. This requires focusing on the so-called “design, build and operate” process. New jobs and ways of working will only be possible if Hong Kong considers not only the interests of employers and capital providers, but also those of workers, citizens and the community.
Christine Loh Kung-wai is chief executive of the think-tank Civic Exchange. cloh@civic-exchange.org
