It isn’t just Carrie Lam who needs to listen to the people. So does the whole of Hong Kong’s civil service

The civil service needs to listen, not only to the younger generation, but to everyone in Hong Kong who cares enough to march. Officials all too often ignore public input rather than taking notice of what people say they need in their neighbourhoods

Ian Brownlee

Published: 6:30am, 3 Jul 2019

Why you can trust SCMP

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor has apologised for seeking to introduce the extradition bill that set off a wave of unprecedented protests and violence. She has said she will reform her administration’s governing style and listen to the people.

But it is not just the chief executive who needs to listen to the public – the whole of the civil service needs a change in attitude. Nor is it just the younger generation whom officials should listen to; rather, they need to listen to all the members of the community who care enough about Hong Kong to march in stifling heat and humidity and in some cases, multiple times.

In the areas of planning, land development and community support where I am involved, the public makes many positive suggestions and proposals for improvement. In almost every case, however, public input is ignored – or, worse, just rejected by the civil service without a good reason.

A repetitive process of so-called “public engagement” lasting two to three years for major policies or projects is seen as a farce by most participants. There are structured consultation events and processes but there is never any real engagement. It’s just a process that needs to be completed.

For town planning, the public has the right to send in written submissions and attend hearings. Town Planning Board members give up their own time to sit for days to hear these submissions. Inevitably, even when there are thousands of representations to be heard, government papers which guide the board recommend “no change be made to meet the representations”.

The deliberations that take place among Town Planning Board members increasingly reflect different views, with many wanting to adopt some of the good points proposed by the public. However, these debates are overridden by the directive from the government, which has taken a position before the public is even heard.

In its relationship with district councils, the civil service also shows little respect for input from these elected representatives. After years of “consultation”, the administration continues to ignore the input of the councillors with regard to the neighbourhoods they represent.

For instance, the Yau Tsim Mong District Council was consulted over a period of about five years about construction on an area of community land at Sai Yee Street near an MTR station. The council pointed out that Mong Kok was too commercial, overcrowded and lacked community support facilities, public open space and a swimming pool. Nevertheless, the government proposed a 75-storey landmark commercial building, complete with a shopping centre and some community services.

The district council countered that the last thing Mong Kok needed was another commercial building. In response, the government reduced the building height by 30 metres but officials ignored the council’s comments about meeting community needs by instead using the site for low-rise community buildings and open space.

In consultation with the government, the Yau Tsim Mong District Council said Mong Kok, already lacking public open space, did not need another commercial building. But the government proposed a high-rise commercial building anyway. Photo: Bloomberg

Although the councillors clearly knew the community’s needs better than the government officials did, they were simply ignored. Why couldn’t the officials accept their input and use the site to provide facilities which everyone knows are in short supply.

This was just one opportunity where community building could have been given priority and a win-win outcome could have been achieved. Instead, community needs were basically ignored. Many public facilities are falling into a state of disrepair, given their age and inadequate maintenance.

In every district, there are footpaths that need to be improved and made safe for the increasingly aged population. A plan for public seating along footpaths and at bus stops would be welcome. To really engage with the public about things affecting daily life, there could be a focus on better management of road surfaces, footbridges, waste collection and landscaping.

There is an enormous amount of expertise and knowledge throughout civil society, in non-governmental organisations, academia and professional bodies. Their offers to share and develop community-based processes are often ignored by the civil servants. It is a shame, but often no government official takes part in these forums, discussions and exchanges of information on radio or TV. The government is holding Hong Kong back from achieving more in so many areas.

Is the current crisis going to be an impetus for change – for the government to listen and also really engage? Hong Kong officials need to start by accepting that the government does not always know best, and that it should willingly accept what other people suggest.

Ian Brownlee is managing director of Masterplan Limited and represents many sectors of society on planning and development matters

Post