Insight | Policy Address: more of the same

The chief executive went to the Legislative Assembly (AL) last week to deliver his much anticipated policy address. It was highly disappointing for those who expected a new impetus given the fact that Macau has a “new government.”
Some secretaries may have a reformist purpose, but, as sociology explains, if reformism is not induced from the top, it risks becoming dead letter.
The policy address is more of the same. Besides the announcement of further social welfare measures directed at the elderly population (which suffers most with the rising inflation) and regional cooperation policies that seem to be made in Beijing, there isn’t a long-term plan to develop the region. The speech made by the CE was often vague and resorted to platitudes about economic diversification to compensate the fall in gaming revenue. This year there was not even a strong idea that could be sold by political marketeers, like the investment in the “local talent” training announced last year. And the new measures, like the creation of consultative municipal bodies, are presented without clarity or plausible justification (the Basic Law has large shoulders). There are also some pernicious ideas being repeated ‘ad nauseum,’ like the politically correct emphasis of the protection of local work above all else. I say pernicious because it gives residents a certain assurance that they are entitled to a job only because they hold a card. Or, in other words, that they have a divine entitlement to a job. The consequence of this line of thinking is a spiral of incompetence and self-indulgence.
If we reflect on the policy address for the 2014 fiscal year, entitled “Enhancing Comprehensive Strength and Promoting Sustainable Growth” and presented to the AL on 12 November 2013, we find most of the same topics addressed this year and also the same vagueness: “The areas of priority for Macau SAR Government in 2014 include: accelerating construction of long-term mechanisms and working hard to promote livelihood projects; striving to achieve a blueprint for social development and continuously promoting moderate economic diversification; improving the efficiency of the public administration, and improving the quality of public services.” [source: IPIM] In the blueprint of the politics for 2014 we can also find the announcement of some ideas that I compare to the “municipal bodies” now proposed. They can easily go up in smoke after some public consultation sessions: “In his speech, the Chief Executive stressed the well-known motto “Macau land for Macau people,” hinting that the government is studying the concept to provide housing and its conclusion is foreseen for 2014, followed by the launch of public consultations. However, it was not clear if Chui Sai On was referring to allowing some of the houses to be sold only to Macau residents.” [MDT, November 11, 2013] What has been made of this “Macau land for Macau people” policy? What resulted from it?
And then there is the decreasing quality of the parliamentary debate. The fault of this, of course, does not lie solely with the government. Some lawmakers, included appointed ones, lack culture, common sense or knowledge of the law. They simply don’t know what they are talking about. The conscious citizen should watch the policy address sessions broadcast by TDM with consternation.
To give one of many possible examples, lawmaker Zheng Anting asks secretary Sonia Chan if it is possible to include information related to the bus card (MacauPass) in the ID cards. That would, he said, make the residents the only beneficiaries from the bus fare discounts – a reformulation of an old idea of his; he once advocated a fleet of buses only for residents, Dubai style. Secretary Chan wisely points out that the bus card is in plastic money and asks one of her advisers to elaborate. The adviser says that there is no consensus on the matter which
is, I guess, a Chinese way of saying no.
Perhaps this time good sense will prevail, but this is just one example of the issues brought out by lawmakers during the policy address.