Free Gear Kier - He'd be locked up in Hong Kong!

"The terms 'sleaze' or 'cronyism' are wordplay conjured up to downplay what is corruption."

Local media reported yesterday (24 September 2024) that Singapore's former transport minister, S. Iswaran, pleaded guilty to receiving gifts in office. The case revolves around Iswaran receiving favours, including tickets to English Premier League soccer matches and the Singapore Formula One Grand Prix. He's looking at a spell in jail.

It's crucial to understand that in Singapore, Hong Kong, and elsewhere in Asia, giving gifts to officials is frowned upon and considered a severe breach of trust and a form of corruption. This understanding is vital in grasping the severe consequences of such actions. That's not to suggest that corruption doesn't exist in Asia, far from it; yet, many places have faced the challenge head-on and brought corruption under control, notably Singapore and Hong Kong. 

In Hong Kong, stringent laws hold civil servants and politicians accountable and ensure official business is conducted cleanly and free from any back-door influence. This commitment to clean governance is a cornerstone of the city's administration. 

Under Civil Service Regulation 444 (2), gifts offered to a civil servant by virtue of the official position are regarded as advantages to the officer's department. When it is considered inappropriate to return the gifts to the donor, the officer should report and hand over the gifts received to the department for disposal.

Also, under section 4 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), a Government officer soliciting or accepting any advantage as an inducement, reward, or reason for abusing his official power or position in his official capacity shall be guilty of an offence, punishable by a maximum fine of HK$500,000 and imprisonment for seven years.

Significantly, the POBO does not specify any ceiling of allowable advantages for corruption offences. Hence, the receiver and offeror will commit an offence if he accepts or offers an advantage of any value if it falls into corrupt dealings as specified in the POBO. The key factors are the purpose or motive and the circumstances of the acceptance or offer, not the value.

I recall having to declare a T-shirt given to me at a road safety event. On another occasion, an old man randomly approached my patrolling officers at Chinese New Year to hand over a red packet containing cake coupons. Several officers tried to reject the offer, but the man insisted, stating the red packet contained no money and only a blessing message. At the end of the shift, the officers came forward, and I recovered 15 red packets. These were logged in and handed to the property store. 

Whatever the man's motivation, it was inappropriate for officers to retain the coupons because even the inference of a bribe does damage. 

On the corruption front, Hong Kong's legal system is renowned for its fearlessness in going after the big fish. In 2012, Rafael Hui, the former number two in the Hong Kong government, was arrested by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) and convicted of five counts of 'Misconduct in Public Office'. Hui was found to have accepted bribes from prominent businessmen. This case serves as a testament to the fairness and fearlessness of Hong Kong's legal system, reassuring the public of its ability to uphold justice. 

Interestingly, the prosecution did not need to prove that Hui did any acts that favoured the businessmen. Instead, he put himself in the position of owing them a favour because he'd taken bribes. The court judged that sufficient to convict him. 

Likewise, in 2015, a former Chief Executive, Donald Tsang, was convicted by a jury of corruption. In Tsang's case, an apartment he owed underwent redecoration paid for by a businessman seeking a TV broadcast license. On 26 June 2019, the Court of Final Appeal unanimously quashed his conviction and sentence after finding that the trial judge had failed to direct his jurors properly. The Court did not require a new trial of Tsang, who'd already served months in jail. 

These tales bring me to the current British Prime Minister, Sir Kier Rodney Starmer. He stood on a platform of clean government, frequently calling out the alleged sleaze under the governing Conservatives. Fast-track contracts for the friends of ministers to secure lucrative Covid PPE contracts and other unscrupulous actions litter the years of Tory rule. And in response, Starmer made much play of being a 'clean' man.

Yet we now know that Labour-appointed peer Lord Waheed Alli gave Starmer glasses valued at £2,500, clothes valued at £16,200, football tickets valued at about £17,000, accommodation valued at £20,000, and concert tickets costing some £4,400. 

While Starmer declared most of these items, the question of transparency remains: What did the donor, Lord Alli, expect for such generosity? This case underscores the crucial and urgent need for transparency in political actions and the potential consequences of a lack thereof. 

Labour has sought to defend these 'gifts' as being less severe than the sleaze that the Conservatives engaged in. This untenable excuse is fueling outrage and amounts to, “Yes, we broke into your home but didn’t steal as much as the other bloke.”

Moreover, reasonable questions should be asked why Starmer, a multi-millionaire with an estimated value of £10 million, would need support to purchase glasses, clothes, and football tickets. Further, would Lord Alli be handing over these vast sums if Starmer wasn't the Prime Minister? No. 

In August 2024, the press reported that Lord Alli was granted unrestricted access to 10 Downing Street, uncommon for anyone not formally employed in the Prime Minister's office. It looks like the man bought the keys to Nos 10 -  literally!

Even the terms 'sleaze' or 'cronyism' are wordplay conjured up to downplay what is essentially corruption. Just like 'rape gangs' become 'grooming gangs,' the message is massaged to lessen its significance and excuse graft. 

In the bad old days, I'm told that brown envelopes left on desks quietly distributed corrupt money across the Hong Kong Police Force to passive 'bus riders' to taint them. Thankfully, all that stopped before I joined.

In the UK, corruption is facilitated by rules on declaration that offer cover to politicians who hide behind the excuse, "I declared it." These rules and associated processes ignore the underlying motives of donors and the expectations placed on beneficiary politicians.  

If Starmer were in Hong Kong, he'd now face a morning knock from the ICAC. But then again, the Hong Kong government is cleaner, as affirmed by international ratings. So, instead of scolding Hong Kong, British politicians could learn from us how to run a clean government. That assumes they have the willingness and courage, which 'free gear Kier'  appears to lack.

Post Script

​A story is emerging that the governing Labour Party took its largest donation of £4 million from a Cayman Island-based hedge fund engaged in the arms trade. This donation came in on 28 May 2024 but was only published last week, more than two months after Labour won the election. Why the delay? There is no doubt more to follow in this story.

Update

On 3rd October, S Iswaran, the Singaporean former minister, was sentenced to 12 months in prison for obstruction of justice and accepting illegal gifts. Meanwhile, Kier Starmer has begun repaying the gifts he received, tacitly acknowledging wrongdoing.