Security Secretary Chris Tang outlines four threats to national security, notably ‘soft resistance’, which he describes as…
…people [using] fake news or information to incite dissatisfaction against the Hong Kong government or stir up conflict among residents, he said.
“This is extremely harmful,” Tang said. “Soft resistance uses problems that seem to be insignificant, simple societal or livelihood issues, where fake news or information is used to stir discontent towards the government.”
The security chief cited the example of the Wang Fuk Court blaze, in which some falsely claimed that authorities had prepared to deploy riot police against the estate’s residents or that first responders did not have enough protective equipment.
“You can see that with any societal topic, there will be some people hoping to stir up conflicts around them,” he said, urging residents to listen to government clarifications and seek out facts.
Would this be a problem if people had more trust in the government, all-patriot lawmakers and pro-government media to begin with? Why don’t they?
Other threats to national security, he said, included the use of sanctions, ‘fugitives calling for Hong Kong independence’ and domestic terrorism such as…
…the groups “Returning Valiant” and “Dragon Slayer Brigade”, with the latter behind a thwarted 2019 bomb plot targeting Hong Kong police.
His remarks came just a day after he told the city’s newest cohort of police officers that they would need “iron bones” in the face of unrelenting “oppression by hostile foreign forces”.
Or – just write out more parking tickets.
Pro-Beijing elder Tam Yiu-chung speaks out against what we might call ‘soft resistance’ in LegCo…
Speaking on a TV programme, Tam said Beijing’s hope is for the three branches of government to co-operate and work towards the same goal.
“The branches should work together within the same framework, avoiding mutual attacks and smear campaigns. They should be actively supporting and co-operating with each other throughout the process,” he said.
“Monitoring still exists in the system, but Legco must not overstep its boundaries – which is replacing the executive branch.
‘Still exists’? Has anyone amended the Basic Law while we weren’t looking? It’s all there in Articles 66-79.
Mable is unable. To enforce the new seat-belts-on-buses law, that is…
The Hong Kong transport chief has announced that a controversial law requiring bus passengers to fasten their seat belts will be “repealed as soon as possible” due to a “technical shortcoming” in the provision.
…The abrupt reversal comes just five days after the new law was implemented, sparking widespread public backlash. Under the law, bus passengers not wearing a seat belt risk a maximum fine of HK$5,000 and up to three months in prison.
Former lawmaker Doreen Kong wrote on Facebook on Thursday that, according to the provision’s wording, the rule appeared to apply only to buses registered after the law took effect, meaning passengers on older buses were not required to wear seat belts.
…The transport minister previously said on Sunday that the government would focus on public education rather than harsh law enforcement during the initial stages of the new regulation, striking a balance between “empathy, reason, and law.”
So the legal drafters, policy bureau and lawmakers screwed up? Gold Bauhinia Medals all round! Alternatively, maybe the wording is just a bit slapdash or ambiguous. (I’m not qualified to say/can’t be bothered to read it.) If that were the case, this looks more like a panicky retreat in the face of a pissed-off public. The whole exercise didn’t seem to have incorporated views from people who actually ride buses – ie pretty much everyone not in the government.
Oddly, ‘public opinion’ counts when it comes to private cars…
The proposal to charge a border construction fee on private cars leaving via land checkpoints has been dropped after public opposition.
…Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Christopher Hui Ching-yu said the government carefully considered diverse views and decided not to proceed at this stage.
The 2025 Budget suggested studying a fee—estimated at HK$200 per car—to generate about HK$1 billion annually from departing private cars at land border control points. Buses and goods vehicles would be exempt.
The idea faced strong backlash over cost, impact on cross-boundary travel for residents and businesses, and potential harm to integration with national development.
A car toll harms ‘integration with national development’?
The Standard gives Raphael Hui a rousing send-off, lauding his role in the HK$100 billion market intervention in 1997 and his achievement in getting to be Chief Secretary a few years later. It also allows that…
…he was involved in the Sun Hung Kai probe, the city’s biggest-ever corruption case. Hui was then arrested in March 2012 and charged with misconduct in public office for allegedly accepting multiple payments and unsecured loans…
…He was sentenced to 7.5 years in prison and ordered to return HK$11.182 million in bribes.
…Hui was also reportedly spending HK$210,000 on a single French meal, HK$2 million on records over several years, and approximately HK$7 million on expensive wines. He also disclosed in court that he paid HK$8.5 million to his Shanghai mistress.
Seems the law was soundly worded, it just decreed that seatbelts were only mandatory on newly registered buses (from January 2026). It was the related govt press release (and so the lazy local media, and senior officials) that said/assumed all buses new and old, as belatedly pointed out by Doreen Kong (who has gone up in my estimation). I doubt there will be a rush to revise the law, though whether it was intended to cover all or only new buses seems unclear.
Just install the wretched seat belts and let people decide whether they want to use them or not (they do not).
If Chris Tang could maybe explain „soft resistance“ in the context of Marxism-Leninism „ the guiding principle of the CCP“ ( their words), I would understand it much better.
Privilege is believing that ‘livelihood and societal issues’ are ‘insignificant’
No such luxuries for Rafael Hui. Or his Shanghai girlfriend, by the sounds of it.
Was it a coincidence that HMV went bust soon after he got banged up?
Strewth! Rafael’s mistress in Shanghai had HKD8.5 mil tucked into her cleavage. And this was before the days of Only Fans…
@Ralph Cramden—Speak for yourself. Some of us are sensible enough to use them. Not only that, but since an unsecured human body becomes a projectile in a high-speed crash, we would prefer that others did so too.
Raphael Hui’s only crime was that he got caught. Most others don’t, in Asia’s Most Corrupt City.
@Low Profile
The human body as a projectile? Really?
That’s how far you’ll reach for an excuse to tell other people what to do?
Your inner fascist is showing.
Buckle your own seat belt if you want to.
Leave me and my seat belt alone.
Ralph Cramden:
Ohio department of public safety:
“In a crash, your body keeps moving even if the vehicle stops. If you’re not buckled up, you could be thrown into another passenger and cause serious injuries. Don’t become a projectile – wear your seatbelt every time.”
It’s basic physics – Newton’s second law.
@AHW
Thanks for the physics lesson. I had no idea. Who’d a thunk it?
The point is, have a little respect for personal autonomy, especially in a jurisdiction where there is so little of it left.
Coercing people just because you can is the HK govt motto.
Don’t encourage them, FFS.