Companies must help defuse Hong Kong’s crisis, and do what the government can’t

Like the wildfires in Australia, the political flames in Hong Kong burn hotter with each outbreak. Given that the government shows no intention of heeding the public’s voices, corporate Hong Kong must get to work on community engagement

Mark Clifford

Published: 9:15am, 15 Jan 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

“How will it end?” It’s the most common question I get from friends abroad who want to know about Hong Kong.

Last November, it looked like protests might end with the big bang of a crackdown. Ironically, given our government’s distrust of democracy, the district council elections provided a kind of firebreak that stopped an escalation of violence. But those who somehow think the protests have been reduced to a whimper are likely to be disappointed. There is no end in sight to Hong Kong’s upheaval.

We can look back now and see that the demonstrations of 2003 and the Occupy movement of 2014 were mild warnings before the firestorm of 2019. Like the wildfires in Australia, the political flames in Hong Kong burn hotter and longer with each outbreak. If the underlying causes of Hong Kong’s summer of discontent are not addressed, then the fires will probably break out again. That is true even if – perhaps especially if – thousands of protesters are jailed, as appears to be the government’s current strategy.

I hope that the worst of the violence and disruption is behind us. But hope is not a strategy, especially not for businesses. What can companies do to ensure that they aren’t caught in the next conflagration? How can they do this in a way that is respectful to those who don’t agree and that is in keeping with Hong Kong’s long-standing commitment to tolerance and civility? Genuine community engagement is key.

We need to accept that Hong Kong is in the midst of a deep-rooted civil conflict of the sort that lasts decades. November’s district council elections, where pro-democrats trounced pro-government forces, were a referendum on the protests and on the government’s performance. In most countries, the government would have fallen after such a dismal performance at the ballot box.

The Basic Law proclaims that universal suffrage is the “ultimate aim” in Hong Kong’s Legislative Council and chief executive elections. It is now clear, after nearly 23 years, that there is no intention to keep this promise or heed the voices of the majority of Hongkongers. Coupled with the perception that China is smothering Hong Kong’s freedoms, there is no escape from a drawn-out civil conflict.

If universal suffrage is off the table for the moment, what can be done within the existing framework?

Hong Kong is no longer ‘Asia’s World City’. Time for a radical rebranding

For a start, the government could open up its various advisory bodies and other appointments within its control to a broader section of people. The best example of a government that is intent on not listening to the people is its use of Lau Ming-wai as the go-to guy for dealing with youth issues.

I have nothing against Lau, who I found to be a personable and earnest person when we once had lunch, but the idea that a billionaire’s son just shy of his 40th birthday has become the voice of youth issues is laughable.

There are plenty of people the government could talk to if it wanted to do more than solicit the opinions of those who wouldn’t disagree with it. Civil society has blossomed since 1997 and the incredible social entrepreneurs leading these groups could tell the government what the real issues affecting our community are.

There are groups giving comfort to street sleepers, helping refugees learn computer skills, helping mainland mothers and their children survive in Hong Kong. Another group I recently met helps impoverished families of young diabetics – the government pays for insulin but not syringes.

Yet another teaches poor children how to swim. None of these more than a dozen micro charities that I’ve met in recent months gets money from the government – yet their staff and their beneficiaries would each have something to teach officials about not just the needs but the dreams and desires of Hong Kong’s less advantaged. OK, I’m dreaming. The government isn’t going to do anything about this. So what can the rest of us do?

How Beijing’s new man in Hong Kong can avoid Chris Patten’s fatal mistakes

Companies need to see the events of recent months as a catalyst to embrace the community, or they, too, could be carried away in the next uprising – and there will be a next time, given the hardening positions on both sides. Corporate social responsibility programmes in Hong Kong are, for the most part, minimal, feel-good exercises, with little long-term impact on the community.

Corporations would be well-advised to start building up more social credit, to start earning their licence to operate. The destruction of Starbucks stores shows what happens when that trust is gone.

Hong Kong is a generous society. This generosity needs to be more systematic, more relevant to the real needs of the community, and harnessed with the creativity and energy of employees and others with the know-how and money that companies are best placed to provide.

This is an old-fashioned, paternalistic approach that will, at best, buy a bit of time. It is also our best chance of salving some of the wounds we have suffered in the absence of government leadership. Don’t look to the government for help, Hong Kong. Let’s look to each other.

Mark Clifford is executive director of the Asia Business Council

Post