Blog Archives

Walter's Blog

"But how can you live and have no story to tell?" Fyodor Dostoevsky

Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact free rant unfiltered by rational argument.

"If you want to read a blog to get a sense of what is going on in Hong Kong these days or a blog that would tell you what life was like living in colonial Hong Kong, this blog, WALTER'S BLOG, fits the bill." Hong Kong Blog Review

Hong Kong weather

29/4/2023 0 Comments

Fireman Wong and the Identity Crisis

"I struggle to comprehend the mentality of those who elect to fight the issue of Hong Kong's identity on the battleground of an alleged sex offender."

Fireman Wong Yiu-tak faced arrest on Wednesday by the Japanese police for an alleged sex attack in Tokyo. Wong, on his honeymoon, left his new wife in the hotel on Sunday evening while he went out for food. Yes, he was there on his honeymoon!

Reports say he approached a Japanese lady asking directions before dragging her into a nearby toilet. There he apparently molested her — some reports say he raped her.

Working from CCTV coverage, the police identified Wong, detaining him as he checked out of his hotel. He will have his day in court and could face five to twenty years in jail if convicted. Meanwhile, his poor wife and the victim must process these traumatic events.

What intrigues me is how this saga soon embroiled the debate around Hong Kong people's identity. First, the Japanese media reported that Wong was "Chinese", which is true. However, gullible anti-China elements immediately seized upon this as meaning Wong came from the mainland.

On social media, these malcontents began a torrent of vile comments. They attacked mainlanders, attributing no end of horrors to them. Yet, when it emerged that Wong came from Hong Kong, their prejudice caught them out as they fell silent.

Others, unwilling to drop the matter, rebuked the Japanese media reports, asserting that Wong should be described as a "Hongkonger".

I struggle to comprehend the mentality of those who elect to fight the issue of Hong Kong's identity on the battleground of an alleged sex offender. What an absurd and alarming approach.

Yet I suppose some Hong Kong people still grapple with defining their identity. This struggle is understandable because all humans seek a defining uniqueness.

Still, if Hong Kong suffers an identity crisis, this is self-generated. A walk around Central or Kowloon demonstrates Hong Kong's cosmopolitan vibrancy mixed with Cantonese and broader Chinese culture. Sure, you hear more Mandarin spoken these days, but that's to be expected.

For generations, Hong Kong held a unique status in the eyes of many people on the mainland and here. As a world-class trade and finance centre, this prosperous international metropolis showed what was possible. Likewise, Hong Kong's movies and entertainment sector shaped perceptions.

Simply put, although Hong Kong remains a vibrant city, mainland cities like Shanghai and Shenzhen have overshadowed its original brilliance. These successes and Hong Kong's slippage damaged the brand of the local identity. In turn, this generated animosity that helped drive the 2019 protests. But what people forget is change is always with us.

Since I arrived here in 1980, this place has constantly evolved, with the latest iteration no different from what we saw in the past. Let's remember that Hong Kong has absorbed wanderers, refugees and migrants of all hues, including millions of folks from the mainland.

Unfortunately, many Hongkongers yearn for a past, an era seen through the rose-tinted visage of perceived simpler times. Some have now fallen into a council of despair hankering for something that never existed. In the process, they’ve ignored it was always the confluence with China that sustained this place. And once deeply contemptuous of their countrymen from the North, they now find their mainland cousins prospering and taking great strides forward.

Sometimes you have to embrace the complexity. I'm a proud Hong Kong citizen with family ties to the United Kingdom. I was born there, and those bonds remain with you. But, likewise, I recognise my adopted home is an integral part of China with all the issues and advantages that status confers.

For me, drawing distinctions or placing a line between these various categories of identity lays the seeds of division that are the root of many world problems. So rather than draw boundaries, I'd rather see a Venn diagram of intersections. Because at the end of the day, we are all citizens of this tiny blue dot sitting in the vastness of space. That's our ultimate identity.

Anyway, getting back to Earth, no matter how you cut it, this Tokyo incident has damaged Hong Kong's reputation. Even so, Japan remains a massively popular tourist destination for the city's people, who embrace the food, sights and warmth of the Japanese.

Therefore, it is gratifying to see that some Hong Kong netizens acknowledge the impact of this event. At least some folks haven't lost their minds or sense of common decency.

0 Comments

23/4/2023 0 Comments

Is Dominic Raab a bully?

"While I am not condoning nastiness in the workplace, the Raab saga suggests that fragile types believe that any robust scrutiny of their work amounts to "bullying".

I'll start with a confession. I joined the consensus decrying British Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab as he resigned over bullying allegations. Given the media reports — based chiefly on leaks — it appears that Raab was a bit of a bastard who got what was coming to him.

Then I read the inquiry report that prompted the resignation. As I ran through the 48 pages, my views changed as I formed the distinct impression of a stitch-up.

Let's step back, setting aside any prejudices to recognise a few principles underpin natural justice. These encompass the rule against bias and the right to a fair hearing, a reasonable opportunity to answer, and present one's case. Moreover, natural justice includes the right to know the accuser. In turn, comes the chance to challenge their account by cross-examination, and the evidence must support the allegation.

I'd argue that Raab receives a diluted or degraded form of justice in this instance. He gets to give his version of events, but the confidentiality of alleged "victims" prevents a direct and thorough cross-examination. Moreover, this anonymity is unfair, given the abundance of evidence that the complainants coordinated their efforts against Raab.

The inquiry report is heavy on legal definitions, stated cases, and the mechanisms used to gather evidence. For sure, the author, barrister Adam Tolloy KC, is keen to demonstrate the legitimacy of the process, going overboard with the preamble.

Yet as I read it, a voice in my head kept shouting, "Show me the evidence." By the end, I was baffled. If this were a court case, I reckon it's "no case to answer" with Raab waltzing out the door.

For starters, the names involved and the dates and times of alleged bullying incidents are missing, with a few exceptions. Atop that, the report is short on specifics. So instead, we have a couple of broad-brush allegations that may or may not stand up to scrutiny. I can't answer either way because the details are missing.

I'm no fan of Raab; indeed, the opposite. From what I've seen, he's an unsympathetic character who excudes no personal warmth, little in the way of empathy and sneers a lot. In July 2021, as the then UK's Foreign Secretary, he remained on a sun-bed as British troops struggled to evacuate from Kabul. That is a significant black mark against him.

Yet, none of this is enough to justify what appears to be a pooled effort by over-sensitive civil servants to remove him.

No doubt Raab is a right pain in the backside to work for, especially if you're the sort who likes to clock off at 5 pm. He grafts more than 14 hours daily, pays close attention to detail and is diligent, decisive and principled. The report states that Raab is sometimes demanding of others in a manner that is occasionally direct. You know, the qualities you'd expect from a minister dealing with challenging issues.

Significantly, the report concludes that Raab didn't shout or swear, and there was no evidence of him ever losing control of his temper. So on that basis, the civil servants should count themselves lucky.

I can attest to many bosses who did all those things, and I learned to live with it, fight back and protect my corner. One individual I worked for enjoyed his daily humiliation of subordinates at "morning prayers". He'd mock people's answers, interrupt before they could finish, and behave like a dick.

It took me a couple of weeks, but I got his measure. I'd put the phone down on him until he adopted a civil tone. He soon got the message, respecting the pushback like a true bully.

While I am not condoning nastiness in the workplace, the Raab saga suggests that fragile types believe that any robust scrutiny of their work amounts to "bullying", even when they're doing a lousy job.

The civil servants might have responded to Raab's manner by doing all they could to help him. But instead, the report makes clear that groups of civil servants conspired on the first complaint, which in turn triggered and paved the way for further group complaints.

The report finds Raab "guilty" in two instances. One involved the removal of an official he judged to be undermining Brexit negotiations. That decision is entirely within his purview. The other was when he was allegedly "intimidating and insulting" to officials whose work he thought inadequate. He is accused of saying they "didn't even cover the basics.” That he gave such criticism in front of others offended the recipient. Oh, dear!

Anyone waiting weeks for a new passport, driving licence or any government service will identify with his exasperation. Indeed they may think he should have been more forceful.

Since "bullying" is somewhat subjective, there will be those who regard him as an arsehole and others for whom "demanding boss" might be a more apt description.

I tend to view that entrenched interests, which should support the minister, have decided to take him down — a weak Prime Minister proved a willing accomplice in this process. All the while, the principles of natural justice have fallen away to allow sniping from the shadows. And those snipers have made a kill.

All of which begs the question, what happened to the supposed robust democratic systems, transparency and fairness? If Raab has done terrible things, show us the proof because, for now, the charges don't stand up. A copy of the report is below.

Lastly, a bit of fear can motivate us to achieve excellence, whether it's a business, sport, or government. And that's the real issue here because, in today's victim culture demanding high standards can hurt feelings. The fact remains tough bosses get the best out of us. You hate them for it, but the sense of achievement is enormous when you excel.

Hence, it's hard not to conclude the falling standards that blight Britain have their origin here.

2023.04.20_investigation_report_to_the_prime_minister.pdf
File Size:	556 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

0 Comments

21/4/2023 0 Comments

Rewarding Failure

"...the government could award the company HK$5.5 million. That cash is for putting right a problem they’ve created."

OK, this is bonkers. On Wednesday, Hong Kong Electric staff connected the wrong cable during a routine test, causing a power outage. People trapped in lifts needed rescuing as parts of Hong Kong Island went without power for about an hour.

As a result, under the "scheme of control" that manages this monopoly, the government could award the company HK$5.5 million. That cash is for putting right a problem they’ve created.

These incentives aim to encourage prompt repair action by the company. Plus, the payments come on the back of an arrangement that allows the power companies an 8% annual rate of return and the right to raise tariffs yearly. Meanwhile, the public is paying the price.

Hong Kong's electricity is generated, distributed and supplied by two de facto monopolies; one for HK Island and Lamma and one for everywhere else. Under the "scheme of control" since 1964, they are permitted an after-tax rate of return of 8% on fixed assets, fuel, labour and all other costs.

No doubt the electric companies will argue they provide a reliable service. And that is generally true. Yet, is that not a given when granted a license? Indeed, the icing on the cake for them is guaranteed profits that shield the business by allowing increased tariffs in a volatile market.

Over the years, the "scheme of control" has drawn criticism from various quarters. In 2015, both the Competition Commission and the Consumer Council called for more competition in the sector, following the example of Singapore. The government responded by locking in the "scheme of control" for another 15 years until 2034.

David Webb, an investor activist, noted in 2012 that the electric companies appeared to game the system by tilting tariff increases towards larger consumers. This practice came in the face of criticism that people with low incomes suffered from rising prices. He also noted that the power companies could profit from redevelopments on vacated sites. How this factors into their profits and tariffs drew comment.

The power companies laud the "scheme of control" in their publicity. And well they might, given the money it generates for them. On the reverse side, it allows long-term planning, which is to Hong Kong's advantage. As a result, we've avoided the flip-flop policies that blight places like the UK - contributing to near their power grid fails and threatened blackouts.

Yet whether the "scheme of control" drives the efficiencies often cited when private companies run public services is debatable. Given the safety net the government provides the power companies, it is reasonable to ask what is the incentive to innovate, cut costs and provide the cheapest product.

So, while Hong Kong Electric senior executives are busy genuflecting to the public, these real concerns must be raised.

In truth, I see the "scheme of control" as a mixed blessing. Hong Kong can ill afford power disruptions; we need world-class infrastructure and robust management of utilities. Still, the public won't stand for premium prices as they receive substandard service.

Hence effective government supervision is a must, and rewarding failure must stop.

0 Comments

11/4/2023 2 Comments

Canada's Killing Program

"Once we are no longer productive, the system sees us as a drain on the state and the community."

Canadian PM, Justin Trudeau, the supposed great human rights defender, heads a regime of state-sanctioned killing of the poor, traumatised and unwell. When introduced the “Medical Assistance in Dying” (MAiD) program seemed a step forward for choice and dignity. But it is beginning to look like a dystopian system that reduces the cost of providing care by removing the needy from society.

MAiD recorded just under 32,000 “voluntary euthanasia” cases since its start in 2016. Among those instances were healthy people with no signs of a terminal illness. Plus, a fair number of those euthanised live in poverty.

When a disabled veteran couldn't secure an access ramp for her home, state-sponsored suicide was offered as an alternative. Retired Cpl. Christine Gauthier testified last year that a caseworker told her they could give her assisted dying. This proposal shocked Christine, who is also a former Olympian. While wheelchair-bound, she remains active without a terminal illness or a wish to die.

Likewise, a counsellor offered a veteran with PTSD, assisted suicide to resolve his issues. In another case, a lady who couldn't secure social housing opted for a government-assisted death.

Then you have the story of 61-year-old Alan Nichols. He had a history of mild depression and other medical problems but was otherwise healthy. But, when hospitalised in June 2019, within a month he asked to die and was killed. This is despite concerns raised by his family and medical staff. There are many such examples. So what is going on?

I've before discussed the merits of assisted dying in cases of seriously ill folks near the end of life. Such people could wish to have agency over their final moments, and that may well be the most compassionate option. Yet, the Canadians appear to have taken this to an extreme by extending the option to the vulnerable, who are not close to the end.

The average age at the time of MAiD is around 76 years. Cancer (65.6%) is the most cited medical condition, followed by cardiovascular, chronic respiratory and neurological disorders.

Yet in 2021, 219 individuals opted to die whose natural deaths were "not reasonably foreseeable" — that is the official jargon for otherwise healthy people.

As early as April 2019, alarm bells were ringing. The United Nations expressed "extreme concern" that Canada was not ensuring disabled people seeking state-assisted suicide had viable alternatives. Further, the Human Rights Council warned that "assisted dying must not be seen as a cost-effective alternative to providing services for persons with disabilities."

Moreover, there is evidence that disabled and poor people use the MAiD program because the state refuses to provide them with a quality of life. This is occurring just as discussions are underway to extend the program to unwell newborns and teenagers. So what more could go wrong?

To start, there is a link to the organ donation business, which is a beneficiary of MAiD. Such practices create hidden sinister drivers of an already fraught process.

Left-wing writers Beatrice Adler-Bolton and Artie Vierkant theorise in their book "Health Communism" that a market-driven healthcare system imposes a "eugenic and debt burden" on us all. Once we are no longer productive, the system sees us as a drain on the state and the community. As a result, this surplus population, who cannot cover their health care costs, faced alienation and are made to feel like a burden on the state.

They argue that the expansion of MAiD must be viewed within the context of an economic order that encourages the government to retreat from its responsibilities for the public's welfare. Yet in a perverse move, the state appears generous to provide mercy from the austerity their governance designed. The writers have a point.

Without a doubt, something has gone awry because the safeguards to protect vulnerable individuals aren't working. Canadians may soon find themselves in a legal and medical environment in which human beings can be treated little different from the manner of sick or elderly pets. And with such thinking, humanity truly crosses a moral Rubicon.

To shield themselves and dress up the whole process, the language evolves with terms such as "sunset care" and "assisted exit". Accompanying that is an inversion and perversion of logic that asserts the right to die must be available to all; at all times on request. Don't get me wrong, because there is a place for assisted dying with robust checks and balances to shield the powerless.

So, let Canada be a lesson in how it can go wrong. And next time Justin Trudeau seeks to lecture us, remember he leads a euthanasia program that attracts Canadian society's weakest and most vulnerable members. At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, didn't another regime seek similar outcomes but with less finesse?

Or are we entering an era when Soylent Green isn't just a movie, it's a guidebook?

2 Comments

<<Previous

YOUR CART

Walter's Blog

Fireman Wong and the Identity Crisis

Is Dominic Raab a bully?

Rewarding Failure

Canada's Killing Program

Author

Archives

Home

Introduction

Contact Walter