Chief Executive Carrie Lam likes to present herself as a strong leader tackling the major issues of the time. But a look at the government’s approach on two crucial and controversial questions shows a government avoiding tough decisions, pushing them down the road and using public money to public discontent.
 
The current two issues are: land policy and the MPF.
 
There is a lot of noise about the need for land reclamation as an indispensable for solving shortages of land for building. But in any case reclamation takes a long time – at least a decade from the start of works to the completion of buildings. 
 
Meanwhile there is a site in the northern New Territories which is currently a private golf club sitting on public land – no less than 170 hectares. Although the government’s own panel suggested resuming one of the Fanling golf club’s three courses, the whole issue – and that of other private clubs leases – has been put off till 2027.
 
And government compulsory acquisition of other land in the neighbourhood will go full steam ahead, wiping out villages to make way for a new town. If ever there was a case of the interests of a small clique of the rich and influential, this is it. 



It seems doubly shocking given Xi Jinping’s emphasis on reducing disparities! For sure, HK needs more sporting facilities. There is a woeful lack in urban areas, few football fields and only slow growth in exploiting the water resources which lie all around for recreation. The Fanling golf club’s prime hectares stand in sharp contrast to the general availability of public space for sports.
 
 And they say the majority of HK golfers do not belong to any of the private golf clubs here. They play at the three public courses on Kau Sai Chau, an island off Saikung which is unsuitable for urban development. If the government is so concerned with the interests of the HK Golf Club’s members, perhaps it could lease them, say 60 hectares on Kau Sai Chau in return. Or is Kau Sai Chau too remote and rugged for the HK Golf Club  members?
 
This issue is also a reminder of developers’ land banks.
 
The very existence of these so-called land banks is itself an indictment of decades of government policy whereby induced land shortages provide an almost cost-free form of capital gains. The big landlords understood this and have long hoarded land eagerly. But even THEY are sometimes prevented from developing land by the bureaucracy.
 
I noted a recent letter to the editor in the South China Morning Post from an urban planning consultant who has represented developers’ proposals. The consultant complained about the number of proposals for development of private agricultural and brownfield land which were rejected, he said, for no good reason. In five years, he claimed, proposals for developments which would have created 50,000 flats had been rejected. 



True or not, the bureaucracy is power-obsessed and slow-moving, unwilling to force the pace of private development and dragging its feet on issues like the Fanling golf course.
 
The other current example of making a non-decision look like a solution is over the MPF. There has long been a conflict between the expectations of the public and what was promised to the business community when the MPF was created --  that employers could offset their MPF contributions against obligations for long service payments.
 
Now the government is to make available an estimated $17 billion as partial compensation to employers. But that will not eliminate the problem of having two compulsory schemes – Long Service Payments and MPF – running together. 



A forward looking government would merge the two into the MPF – not very difficult if the government has the will. It would of course also need to force a drastic reduction in the still outrageous fees now collected by MPF providers. With MPF assets now nearly $900 billion and an expense ratio which is almost absurd by international standards, these fees are now about $15 billion a year. This is divided up between 17 trustees and various intermediaries. It is a publicly mandated goldmine for the financial sector.
 
The land and MPF issues are linked by bureaucratic stupidity and unwillingness to take on the rich and influential in the interests of the majority of both people and businesses.