Kapok | The Fongchikeongisation of the minds

Eric Sautedé

Honestly speaking, I never expected some of my friends – many of them educated – to fall victim to arguments that only the most cynical and unrefined individuals would dare to use. But here we are, the amended version of the law on the control and prevention of smoking that is paving the way for a long-overdue full ban in public places appears to be able to bring the worst out of even the best, and the very little confidence one might have in people’s rationality can easily go up in smoke!
The most obvious arguments as to why, as a community, we should embrace a full ban on smoking in public have been stated by many, including myself (MDT, May 15th) and these are grounded in independent scientific arguments, both regarding healthcare and the impact on the most exposed business operations, and take into account global trends, including the ones that have affected China in the recent past. The key words here are “independent” and “global”.
When directly elected legislator Zheng Anting, who is a prominent figure in the Macao Jiangmen Communal Society, the one and only association that organized a counter-demonstration in May 2014 to support the Perks’ Bill, openly accompanies gaming promoters to meet with the secretaries in order to question the soundness of the full ban, he is acting as a lobbyist. When the same Mr Zheng quotes the survey done by one of the associations of junkets as well as a study commissioned by gaming operators in order to contest, supposedly scientifically, the arguments of the government in favor of the bill during a plenary meeting of the Legislative Assembly, he at best looks cynical, and for some, like a fool. Even if his intention is noble – I am giving him a lot of credit – in considering the adverse effect the bill could hypothetically have on employment in Macao, how can he sensibly expect to win the argument with such a lack of independence?
In a business environment, it seems perfectly legitimate for gaming operators to lobby the government, at every level and using whatever legal means, against a measure they perceive to be contrary to their interests, but Mr Zheng is not on their payroll; he is a directly elected member of the Assembly embodying the sovereignty of the people. And youth and limited experience are no excuse, as Mr Fong Chi Keong aptly reminds us.
Mr Fong has been a well-known and colorful figure in the Assembly for almost a quarter of a century. On the one hand, he is a true man of the people with a capacity to empathize with the many – I remember seeing him doing his own grocery shopping and talking to everybody in the Red Market, and that was not for show. On the other hand, his many outbursts and unfortunate, often gross, comments regarding many issues, including domestic violence and, most recently, healthcare have made the roster of Chief Executive-appointed legislators look really bad, if not completely irrelevant. By bringing in the arguments of “discrimination” against the poor, the infringement of human rights regarding a preposterous “right to smoke” and the colloquial portrait of Chinese people who “speak, smoke and drink,” Mr Fong appears to be calling for his own demise. The real discrimination is when people cannot afford to pay for expensive healthcare services for treatment for lung cancer or strokes. The real infringement is the government not considering the protection of the citizens – including the victims of second-hand smoking, meaning the vast majority – as its priority. And being Chinese today obviously goes way beyond a very outdated conception of culture that negates the capacity, if not the necessity, to change and adapt. Becoming “a world center for tourism and leisure” implies a few requirements!
Ultimately the question is not really whether there are better measures to prevent people from inhaling nefarious puffs today but rather removing, at long last, an exception in the law that should have never been inserted back in 2011 and strengthening measures that will imbue the government’s public policies with greater consistency.