Scoop of the year: China’s state TV reported the passage of the Article 23 bill most efficiently…
When Hong Kong’s Legislative Council passed a strict national security law under Article 23 of its mini-constitution, the long-expected move hit global headlines within minutes.
Yet China’s state broadcaster CCTV was faster than any of them — it beat out its competitors by posting the results of the vote to its news client on social media platforms nearly 20 minutes before Council members had even started voting.
The government and the Security Bureau both issue statements condemning overseas criticism of the new NatSec law. Both are eight generously-sized paragraphs long and cover much the same points – accusations of ‘smearing’, etc. But the government’s is slightly milder in tone…
“This legislation is indeed the aspiration of the people. After the unanimous passage of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance by the LegCo, members of the public and various sectors of the community including the commercial sector and major chambers of commerce, the legal sector (including the Law Society of Hong Kong), real estate association, the youth sector, other professional sectors and political parties, voiced support for the HKSAR Government’s legislative work through different channels such as issuing public statements. All those raising opposing comments were external forces, as the legislation will increase their cost of and difficulty in endangering our national security. During the public consultation period, the Government received over 13 000 submissions of opinions, of which 98.6 per cent showed support and gave positive comments, indicating that the legislation of Article 23 of the Basic Law has strong popular support.
Secretary for Security Chris Tang’s is a bit more ‘wolf warrior’…
“As a matter of fact, after the Ordinance was passed by the LegCo unanimously, members of the public and various sectors of the community including the commercial sector and major chambers of commerce, the legal sector (including the Law Society of Hong Kong), real estate association, the youth sector, other professional sectors and political parties welcomed and voiced support for the legislation. All those raising opposing comments were external forces, as the legislation will increase their cost of and difficulty in endangering our national security. The Ordinance is a piece of legislation to defend against external forces that endanger our national security, acting like a sturdier door and a more effective door lock to defend our home. Only invaders who want to intrude into our home to plunder and loot will object to Hong Kong’s legislation to safeguard the country. It is incumbent on us to tear off the mask of these external forces so that the public can see their true colours.
Perhaps it wouldn’t hurt to ease off on the defiance and concede that there might be valid concerns about freedom and human rights? A less prickly comment comes from Regina Ip, who Tweets…
Professor Simon Young was spot on when he commented that the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance [Article 23] Law passed by Hong Kong’s legislature yesterday is of little relevance to Hong Kong people except four groups.
They are public officers, government contractors, people already on the radar screen of national security authorities and people in close contact with external organisations, including universities, NGOs, think tanks, professional bodies.
After the victory lap, government officials and lawmakers familiar with the subject should double down on their efforts to assuage the concerns of those who have legitimate queries.
The ‘little relevance’ thing is presumably an attempt to reassure. She assumes that ‘assuaging concerns’ is a priority – rather than, say, scaring people with the prospect of hefty prison sentences.
A post summarizes visitor arrivals to Hong Kong for January 2024 compared with January 2018…
China ↓27.4%
(Jan 2024: 2.98M, Jan 2018: 4.11M)
Taiwan ↓41.0%
South/Southeast Asia ↓12.5%
North Asia ↓47.3%
Australia, NZ, South Pacific ↓28.9%
Americas ↓34.9%
Europe ↓44.5%
Middle East ↓68.7%
Exchange rates haven’t helped, but this clearly goes beyond that. The government’s response (as with attempts to replace emigrating residents) is to try shoveling more Mainlanders in to keep the raw numbers up.
These days I tell potential visitors from overseas not to come to our city anymore. I recommend they go to Japan instead if they need their fix of Orientalism.
“Only invaders who want to intrude into our home to plunder and loot . . .”
More comforting words for the expat population.
Go to Taiwan instead. At least you’ll be supporting an independent, vibrant, democratic nation with free people. The last in the world of majority ethnic Han derived people that cling on to true traditional “Chinese” culture.
Having toiled long days and nites to block the Barbarians at the gate, our Leggers are now hunkering down on measures to ensure that there will be cash in the kitty to keep their rice bowls full.
https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1745593-20240321.htm?spTabChangeable=0
“Lawmaker Peter Koon on Thursday proposed at least doubling the HK$2 subsidised fare for elderly people who use public transport, in an effort to keep the concessionary scheme sustainable.”
“Koon told an RTHK programme that the fare should go up to HK$4 or HK$5”.
The proposed 100+% increase based on “The transportation fare has gone up by around 30 percent since the HK$2 scheme was rolled out.” Do the math.
This before the JoyYou kicks in and its impact can be assessed when fare concessions are limited to bona fide elderly locals.
“Latest government estimates show that the policy would cost HK$6 billion in the coming financial year, up 50 percent from this year. ”
This of course has nothing to do with the increasing numbers of grey haired visitors since Covid restrictions were binned. Until August they can still purchase an elderly Octopus card.
There seems to be some misconception that folk benefitting from the scheme are all Yellows who must be punished.
Will be interesting to see how DAB and FTU, heavily dependent on estate aunties and uncles at polling stations, will respond.
As for the adminstration, it would be prudent that it takes no action until the impact of JoyYou can be ascertained.
Leggers, DABlers, and Reg
Don’t you think that parroting the mantra that Hong Kong was on the “brink of disaster” and how it is now “getting back”, “getting on course”, becoming “more stable” etc. etc. , you are smearing the ‘”silenced majority” of Hong Kong?
I wish I had the CCTV’s prescience, I could clean up in the market
I wonder if a bog roll factory on the mainland would print off some copies of article 23 for my loo for smearing purposes.