In politics, perception is everything
Updated: 2013-08-08 07:20
By Qiu You(HK Edition)
|
|||||||
Following hot on the heels of a series of conflict-of-interest uproars, the respective resignations of two political appointees of the Leung Chun-ying government last week have sent waves of shock across his government. Since Leung took up office 13 months ago, four political appointees in succession have stepped down owing to either credibility or conflict-of-interest issues. They include former development chief Mak Chai-kwong, ExCo members Barry Cheung Chun-yuen and Franklin Lam Fan-keung, as well as the development chief's aide Henry Ho Kin-chung. Of course, let's not forget that development chief Paul Chan Mo-po is still struggling hard to fend off the conflict-of-interest bombshell. This raises mounting concern whether the North East New Territories development project can achieve smooth sailing against growing public distrust.
With the controversy surrounding Leung's top team, one cannot help but ask whether it signals a fundamental flaw in the existing political vetting and declaration of interests system, or rather a lack of political awareness or acumen among these high-ranking political figures. As the saying goes: "In politics, perception is everything". The truth is, reality is nothing when it comes to politics. For the aforementioned political figures, the political fundamental is that not only should they refrain from engaging in conflicts of interest, they should avoid being seen as involved in any way, be it directly or indirectly. They should not even allow such negative public perceptions to arise in the first place. And when it does unfortunately arise, they should come clean in every possible way to quench the fire and prevent it from spreading so as to restore public trust.
In Lam's case, his resignation came immediately after he was cleared by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) concerning charges of making use of insider information to sell two flats ahead of new housing stamp duties, as well as offering extra commission to his real estate agent. Despite this vindication, Lam still offered to quit realizing no doubt that this political kitchen was too hot to handle. Or is it that he feels responsible for causing such a credibility issue as well as inciting public distrust. Since Lam and his family own several properties in the city, he may foresee difficulties ahead in advising on housing issues.
As I wrote above, even if one is law-abiding and fully complies with the declaration requirements under the system, once negative perception forms someone's name is already tarnished. When it comes to the issue of integrity involving high-ranking officials who deal with sensitive and confidential information which affects public interest, the public have higher expectations of those public officers' integrity and ethics.
In the case of Ho, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying accepted his resignation and distinguished his case from that of Paul Chan based on his failure to declare his family's interests in land on the same Kwu Tung site that is also the center of Chan's controversy. But even if he had declared his family interests in the project, it would not have meant the public would allow him to continue his work in the development project. Unless his family sells all their shares to a bona fide third party, he would still be perceived as indirectly gaining from the project.
Indeed, the same principle applies to Chan, who is now mired in a conflict-of-interest row over his alleged land-hoarding at Kwu Tung through his family within the development project he steers. Chan insisted he was rule-abiding as he did make a declaration to the Chief Executive in September last year about the three plots of land indirectly held by a company co-owned by his wife. She then sold her company shares to her brother at HK$2.7 million. However, Chan has yet to disclose the details of his declaration. In fact, many questions remained unanswered. Was the transaction market price at the time and was it arranged in the form of a trust? Who are the remaining shareholders of Statement Industries which now holds the land in question? Do they have family ties with Chan?
Even if the above questions are resolved, the transaction still raises the question of the wisdom of Chan indirectly transferring benefits to his in-laws. Unfortunately, Chan has still failed to give the public a full account of these issues. Instead, he has chosen to utter the details in dribs and drabs and keep beating about the bush. Despite admitting that his explanation has been "clumsy", he insisted "he has said all there is to say" without offering a public apology. This evasive attitude will not help him regain public trust. Chan needs to come clean once and for all, otherwise he will drag the entire government down into what LegCo President Jasper Tsang Yok-sing termed the "Tacitus Trap". (Gaius Cornelius Tacitus, 56-117 AD, a Roman senator and historian, wrote that neither good nor bad policies would please the governed if the government is unwelcome, later called the Tacitus Trap in political studies). By then it could snowball into a governance crisis that nobody would like to see.
The author is a current affairs commentator.
(HK Edition 08/08/2013 page1)