A Hong Kong government proposal that will allow the city’s leader to certify criminal acts as national security offences is intended to “make the law clear,” Chief Executive John Lee has said.

Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, Lee said the new subsidiary legislation for Hong Kong’s homegrown national security law, the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, commonly known as Article 23, “is purely to make the law even clearer.”

Shortly after, Lee approved the subsidiary legislation during a meeting with the Executive Council, the city’s top decision-making body.

Under the new law, which was gazetted and came into effect the same day, the chief executive will be able to certify “other offences endangering national security.”

Criminal cases classified as endangering national security will have tougher court procedures, such as a higher bar for bail and trial before designated judges.

“The purpose of introducing the subsidiary legislation is to make it clear, make it much, much clearer, how offences… endangering national security under the law of Hong Kong will be so classified,” Lee told reporters on Tuesday.

“It is not intended and will not expand the definition of the offences, and it’s not adding any new offences or any new powers or punishments. It also does not expand the scope of the application of the law,” he added.

‘Sensitive’ information

Lee said the new piece of legislation would reduce “controversy or debate in court” about what constitutes national security offences.

Asked whether he was concerned about giving an impression of further centralising power into his hands, Lee said the city’s chief executive must shoulder the “important responsibility” of safeguarding national security.

Lee said he would exercise the new power with “prudence and seriousness,” but added that, as city leader, he has access to exclusive information regarding threats to national security.

A lot of activities endangering national security “are committed by state players of another place. They are professional, sophisticated, and the series of information that may be available to indicate the seriousness of the matters [is] privy to the chief executive,” he said.

“A lot of this information is sensitive and not suitable for public disclosure,” he added.

Under the government proposal, the certificate issued by the chief executive will be binding on the city’s courts and cannot be challenged.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Secretary for Justice Paul Lam said the designation of national security offences involves “highly confidential” information that would not be available to the courts.

“The judiciary would not be capable of making such a decision,” Lam said.

Asked whether the chief executive’s certificates will be announced, Lam only said “people will know” as court proceedings are open to the public.

“If you see designated judges or other special arrangements in a trial, you will know” that the case has been designated as relating to national security, he said.

What role the Legislative Council (LegCo) should play in our executive-led system continues to spark controversy.  Lawmakers themselves are discussing the issue, which is a healthy sign. 

Central authorities have also spoken indirectly on LegCo’s role.

On January 26, the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office head Xia Baolong pointed out that executive-led government in Hong Kong means that each branch – executive, legislative, and judicial – performs its “own role and cooperates and coordinates with each other.”

According to Article 64 of the Basic Law, LegCo’s role includes holding the government to account. This means asking questions, asking for justification of government action, investigating government actions and inactions, and, when necessary, sanctioning government officials for policy failures.

According to the Powers and Privileges Ordinance (Cap 382), enacted in 1985, with the select and investigation committee system, as well as the system of policy panels, LegCo has the capacity to fulfil its “own role.”

It is precisely how to understand LegCo’s “own role” that has sparked controversy.

First, may LegCo use the tools it has to hold the government to account? The central authorities have condemned the way the opposition in LegCo used these tools after 2010. They call it abuse, citing filibustering and other tactics that delayed legislation.

The record is clear: the fourth- and fifth-term Legislative Councils passed far fewer bills than either before or after. The sixth-term LegCo was heading in the same direction until the government disqualified some opposition lawmakers, and most of the rest resigned.  

Moreover, both the central and the city’s authorities accuse the opposition of abusing LegCo’s powers to investigate, and to summon and inquire – precisely those powers legislators still have and need to hold the government to account.

In this view, the abuse dates from after 2010 when the opposition and representatives of the central government negotiated a deal over political reform in Hong Kong. It has been downhill ever since, according to Beijing. 

From 1985 to 2010, LegCo convened six select or investigation committees, which focused on issues of public concern: the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) operations and staff loyalty, the chaotic Chek Lap Kok airport opening, short piling in public housing, SARS, misselling Lehman-Brothers minibonds, and conflicts of interest in the post-retirement employment of civil servants.

The result: the government changed course and made improvements in public policy.

For example, authorities introduced the Principal Officials Accountability System (POAS) in 2002, which is still with us today. LegCo’s work and the results of an expert committee investigation on the SARS outbreak in 2003-04 better prepared us for the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. These positive results are undeniable. 

Even in the post-2010 period, pressure from LegCo to investigate sometimes had positive results. In 2015, for example, responding to public concern expressed in the legislature, the government established a commission of inquiry into lead in drinking water in some public housing estates. Again, the government changed course. 

Second, authorities tell us that executive-led government means that LegCo and the executive should “cooperate” and “coordinate.” Does this mean that legislators may not criticise government policy? Reporting indicates that many LegCo members perceive this to be the case. 

Remember Chief Executive John Lee’s harsh rebuke of LegCo member Paul Tse’s criticism of government policy in the first “patriots-only” seventh-term LegCo? The chief executive deemed such criticism “dangerous,” similar to the “soft resistance” of the much-criticised opposition and must be “stamped out.”

The few government critics in the seventh-term LegCo all left the body in 2025. 

More recently, consider the Hospital Authority’s (HA) rebuke after LegCo members Gary Chan, Rebecca Chan, and David Lam expressed concerns that residents might not have collected their HA-provided medication because of increased charges. (A sidenote: Rebecca Chan served as a political assistant in the Food and Health Bureau from 2012 to 2017.)

The legislators drew attention to the very figure disclosed by the Health Bureau: that 26,000 public hospital prescriptions were uncollected after the new fee regime was introduced in January. However, rather than listening and investigating, the HA said the remarks were “untruthful.”

The government apparently prefers to send legislators “warm reminders” on many issues of public concern, in effect telling them to shut up. Precisely because no lawmaker spoke up when LegCo deliberated the bus seatbelt issue in September 2025, the policy resulted in a fiasco. 

The public needs a legislature that is engaged, open, and responsibly critical of government action – this is the minimum required to perform its “own role.”

Of course, LegCo should cooperate and coordinate with the government, but to do so should not compromise the legislature’s “own role.”  

Hong Kong needs a middle way for LegCo – somewhere between the dysfunction seen from the 2014 Umbrella Movement through the 2019 protests and a rubber stamp.

We have experienced a middle way, for example, from 1985 to at least 2010.

At the time, as noted above, LegCo investigations played an important role in improving public policy. Hong Kong people value this kind of LegCo role. It benefits the government and the community, building trust and legitimacy. 

Authorities should trust their own gatekeeping in selecting patriotic LegCo members. Many LegCo members seem to understand that they should play a more active role.

The government should realise that it cannot do everything alone. Effective governance is co-produced.

Authorities need to recognise the legitimacy of a middle way, a more authentic role for LegCo. We will all benefit.

In April, the 70th month since Beijing imposed the national security law, the Hong Kong government applied to the court to seize assets belonging to Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

On National Education Day, a top Chinese official delivered a warning about those who “politicised” the deadly Tai Po fire and tried to “stir up chaos” in the city.

Gov’t seeks to seize Jimmy Lai’s assets

The Hong Kong government filed an application with the High Court on April 2 to seize “offence-related” properties owned by jailed pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai on national security grounds.

In a statement issued the same day, the government mentioned Lai’s earlier convictions under the Beijing-imposed national security law. It said the High Court had found that he was the “mastermind and driving force behind the case, consciously using Apple Daily and his personal influence” to undermine local and Beijing authorities.

In a writ dated April 2, the secretary for justice listed HK$127 million in assets to be “forfeited” to the authorities.

The assets include credit balances in bank accounts belonging to or linked to the Apple Daily founder.

Fifteen bank accounts under Lai’s name – 10 with HSBC, two with Hang Seng Bank and three with Shanghai Commercial and Savings Bank – have over HK$32 million.

The government is also seeking to seize bank accounts belonging to 17 companies linked to Lai. It is also demanding that Lai give up shares in 17 companies, some of which overlap with the 17 firms whose assets the government is seeking to seize.

Among the companies whose assets and shares the government wants to seize are Dico Consultants Ltd, which has over HK$404,302 in its HSBC account, and Lai’s Hotel Properties Ltd, which has over HK$3.1 million in its four HSBC accounts.

Lai has been summoned to the High Court on July 8 to hear the government’s application. The case will be presided over by Esther Toh, one of the three judges who heard his national security trial.

The move to seize Lai’s assets came after the government designated three companies linked to Lai’s now-defunct Apple Daily tabloid “prohibited organisations” in late March and removed them from the corporate registry. Police cordoned off the Apple Daily building in Tseung Kwan O a day later.

The three firms were tried and convicted alongside the Apple Daily founder in his high-profile national security case. Lai was sentenced to 20 years behind bars in early February, while the companies were each fined over HK$3 million.

Political commentator appears in court

A Hong Kong political commentator charged with disclosing details of a national security investigation appeared at the District Court on April 28.

Wong Kwok-ngon, known by his pen name Wong On-yin, has been detained since his arrest in December for allegedly divulging in a YouTube video details of enquiries made by police during a national security investigation.

Judge Stanley Chan said the pre-trial review would take place behind closed doors on August 11, and the trial would begin on October 9.

Wong’s offence falls under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, a homegrown security law known as Article 23. It was added to the ordinance in May as part of subsidiary legislation, and Wong is the first to be charged under the new law.

He is also charged with sedition over videos posted on YouTube between January 3 and December 6 last year. He plans to plead not guilty to both charges.

The defendant, who continues to represent himself, told the court he had dropped his legal aid application.

Asked by the judge whether he had legal knowledge for self-defence, Wong said he had “three law degrees” and was confident of handling the case.

Nat. security clauses for restaurant licences

Secretary for Environment and Ecology Tse Chin-wan said in early April that all Hong Kong restaurant licences would include national security clauses from September.

Tse made the remarks on April 7, nearly a year after the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) introduced the provisions for restaurant licence renewals in May.

“With restaurants renewing their licences gradually, we expect that by September this year, all restaurant licences will contain the clauses,” Tse told reporters, according to RTHK.

Retiree jailed over seditious Facebook posts

A Hong Kong man was jailed for a year under the city’s homegrown national security law after pleading guilty to making seditious remarks on Facebook, including comments supporting Hong Kong’s and Taiwan’s independence.

Raymond Chong pleaded guilty before national security judge Victor So at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on April 14 to one count of knowingly publishing publications with a seditious intention – an offence under the city’s local security law, also known as Article 23.

The magistrate handed Chong, a retiree in his early 60s, an 18-month sentence but discounted it by six months after considering his guilty plea.

Chong was accused of making 53 seditious social media posts between March 2024 and November 2025, local media reported.

The posts had wording such as “dissolving the Chinese Communist Party is the most important thing” and “Hong Kong independence is within sight.”

The defendant posted on a public Facebook page called “Holy Raymond,” which features the Chinese phrase “Heaven will destroy the Chinese Communist Party, God bless Hong Kong” as its profile picture.

During mitigation ahead of sentencing, his lawyer argued that Chong was a Falun Gong believer who had come to hate the Chinese Communist Party because of false information that the CCP engaged in live organ harvesting.

Beijing official warned of ‘politicising’ Tai Po fire

China’s top official in charge of Hong Kong affairs warned of some people who “politicised” the deadly Tai Po fire and tried to use the disaster to “stir up chaos” in Hong Kong.

Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, delivered his remarks on April 15 via a recorded video shown at a National Security Education Day ceremony.

In his speech, Xia mentioned the massive fire that broke out at Wang Fuk Court, a government-subsidised housing estate in Tai Po, on November 26, killing 168 people.

“After the Tai Po fire, some malicious people politicised the tragedy, attempting to use the disaster as a means to disrupt Hong Kong,” Xia said in Mandarin, without giving further details.

“Once again, it reminds us that along Hong Kong’s path toward prosperity under good governance, there will be various risks and challenges.”

Speaking at the same event, Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee also warned that some people were “using the disaster to stir up chaos” and “to incite hatred” in Hong Kong.

“Only through the government’s swift action and decisive law enforcement has the situation been able to return to normal,” Lee said in Mandarin.

French journalist denied entry to city

A French journalist was denied entry to Hong Kong in November, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said in late April, accusing the city’s authorities of “weaponising visas” against foreign media workers.

Antoine Vedeilhe, who was shooting a documentary for French public broadcaster France Télévisions, was questioned upon arrival at Hong Kong International Airport on November 2 last year, RSF said in a statement on April 24.

He was detained for three hours before being deported without being given a reason, it added.

The press freedom NGO said Vedeilhe was the 13th foreign media worker who had been denied entry or a visa by the city’s authorities following Beijing’s imposition of the national security law in 2020.

“In the journalist’s view, his detention was a reprisal for his work on a documentary examining Beijing’s grip on Hong Kong,” RSF said.

Another cameraman for the documentary was able to enter the city, RSF said, but he was followed by “unidentified individuals that he suspects were Hong Kong’s national security police.”

“In the following days, there was a hacking attempt on Vedeilhe’s private email account and his sources in the documentary were harassed by the national security police,” the NGO said.

In an emailed reply to HKFP’s enquiries, the Hong Kong government said it “strongly condemns the smearing remarks and distorted narratives by” RSF.

Prosecution and arrests figures

As of April 1, a total of 394 people have been arrested for “cases involving suspected acts or activities that endanger national security” since Beijing’s national security law came into effect, according to the Security Bureau. That figure includes those arrested under Article 23 and for other offences.

Of the 208 people and five companies that have so far been charged, 180 people and four companies have been convicted or are awaiting sentencing.

In total, 100 people and four companies have been charged under Beijing’s national security law, with 79 persons and three companies convicted. Thirteen people have been charged under Article 23, 10 of whom have been convicted.

Hong Kong media outlets should “make contributions” to national development by telling “good stories” of the city and China amid geopolitical uncertainties, Chief Executive John Lee has said.

Speaking at the annual Hong Kong News Awards ceremony on Friday, Lee said media practitioners in Hong Kong should aspire to contribute not just to the city’s progress, but also to China’s national development.

He made reference to the “Three Deeds to Immortality,” an ancient Chinese philosophy, and urged media workers to establish “virtue,” “contribution,” and “teaching.”

He said promoting national and city interests should be the core values of those in the media industry, especially amid uncertainties in global politics.

See also: Explainer: Hong Kong’s press freedom under the national security law

“Journalism has great influence and therefore comes with great responsibilities,” Lee said in Cantonese. “Such responsibilities include being impartial, not using news for personal gain, and reporting on accurate and high-quality information for residents.”

Lee said the government is working on Hong Kong’s first five-year blueprint in tandem with China’s 15th Five-Year Plan, a set of policy initiatives outlined by the Chinese Communist Party that has set the stage for the country’s social and economic development since the 1950s.

The 15th Five-Year Plan, announced in March, proposes expediting the development of a “Chinese narrative system,” and enhancing the country’s image on the global stage, Lee said.

“Excellent media workers… should assist Hong Kong in serving the country, connecting to the world, and contributing the power of the news to society and people’s wellbeing,” he said.

Lee has called on Hong Kong’s media sector to tell good stories of the city since he became Chief Executive in 2022. He has made similar remarks during past speeches at the Hong Kong News Awards ceremony, thought this was the first time he directly urged media workers to contribute to China’s development.

Hong Kong has plummeted in international press freedom indices since the onset of the 2020 and 2024 security laws. Watchdogs cite the arrest and jailing of journalists, raids on newsrooms and the closure of around 10 media outlets including Apple Daily, Stand News and Citizen News.

Two Hong Kong officials have condemned “groundless accusations” against a recent update to the city’s homegrown national security law, which empowers the chief executive to certify any criminal case as a national security offence.

Secretary for Security Chris Tang told the Legislative Council (LegCo) on Thursday afternoon that he noticed some people had misunderstood or “deliberately misinterpreted” the subsidiary legislation.

They tried to intimidate the public by claiming that the subsidiary law would widen the scope of national security offences, turning minor offences into national security crimes, he said.

The security chief called the accusations “false, misleading, deceptive, and scaremongering” and said some people were attempting to incite hatred towards the government.

“Some people delivered alarmist remarks, saying that the government can randomly certify any acts of the public as national security offences. Those people may have ulterior motives or are cruel-hearted, hoping to incite others’ hatred of the HKSAR,” Tang said in Cantonese.

Also speaking at LegCo, Secretary for Justice Paul Lam said he noticed “some media outlets with ulterior motives, foreign forces, and fugitives” had made “groundless accusations” against the national security law.

The two ministers delivered their remarks during LegCo’s first meeting to review the Safeguarding National Security (Procedural Matters) Regulation, a subsidiary legislation of the homegrown national security law, commonly known as Article 23.

Authorities enacted the subsidiary law through the “negative vetting” mechanism, which allows the law to be gazetted and to take effect before legislative scrutiny.

The law came into effect on Tuesday, one day after the government tabled the bill in LegCo.

Lam, the justice chief, said that the subsidiary legislation was necessary to further explain articles in the Beijing-imposed national security law and Article 23, which stipulate that the chief executive should have the power to determine whether a criminal case involves national security.

In its proposal, the government cited the “legislative intent” of the Beijing-imposed national security law, saying that offences endangering national security include not only the four types of offences under the national security law, but also “other offences endangering national security under the law of the HKSAR.”

Lam said the recent legislative update was intended to further define “other offences endangering national security under the law of the HKSAR,” and it did not introduce any new power or new offences.

Earlier on Tuesday, Chief Executive John Lee said the new subsidiary legislation “is purely to make the law even clearer.”

Hong Kong’s top leader has defended a management firm’s delay in holding a meeting with owners displaced by the deadly Wang Fuk Court fire, saying those procedures must be carried out “in accordance with the law.”

Chief Executive John Lee said at a Tuesday press conference that Hop On Management “has always given people the impression that it is serious,” citing two briefing sessions held online last month and arrangements for maintenance fee refunds.

“My requirement is that they need to handle all matters in accordance with the law,” Lee added.

Lee replied to a reporter’s question about whether the government would take any steps regarding the Lands Tribunal’s decision to deny Hop On’s bid to extend the statutory deadline for an owners’ meeting.

After receiving a petition from Wang Fuk Court homeowners in late April, the firm originally had to call a meeting by May 13 and hold it by June 13.

The Lands Tribunal ruled last week that postponing the deadline would affect homeowners’ rights to have a meeting. Judge Gary Lam said in his ruling that Hop On remained in breach of its statutory obligations and added that it should “convene and hold the meeting as requested as soon as possible.”

Lee said that the tribunal had acknowledged difficulties faced by Hop On, from verifying the petition’s 247 signatures to putting together a complete register of owners’ particulars.

He said that some of the people killed in the fire may have been flat owners and that probate certifications would be needed to account for those cases.

“Hop On needs to make residents understand that it will handle all matters in accordance with the law,” he said, adding that the government would continue to assist the firm.

See also: Wang Fuk Court administrator to study ruling after court rejects bid to extend meeting deadline

Following the tribunal’s ruling, Hop On told HKFP last week that it “is doing its utmost to discharge its duties in accordance with the law, even in difficult times.”

“Hop On is currently conducting a thorough review of the judgment, and will continue with its work in verifying owners’ signatures and identifying a suitable venue, aiming at convening the owners’ meeting while safeguarding the rights and interests of all owners of Wang Fuk Court,” it said.

Hong Kong restaurants with an area larger than 20 square metres can start applying for licences to allow dogs in their premises from May 18, the government has announced.

The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department said in a statement on Thursday that it would accept applications from May 18 to June 8.

The department is set to approve the first batch of applications in mid-June, with dogs to be allowed in restaurants in July.

The statement said that “the FEHD will specify a date in July from which dogs will be allowed to enter permitted food premises.”

While the Food Business (Amendment) Regulation 2026 came into effect on Friday, the FEHD reminded the public that “restaurants must first submit an application and obtain approval before allowing dogs to enter.”

Hotpot and barbecue restaurants are not eligible to apply for the permits, the government said, citing safety concerns.

The FEHD will hold briefing sessions for restaurant operators from Monday to Wednesday next week, as well as on May 28.

The department said it would publish a list of dog-friendly restaurants once the first batch of permits is approved.

The government said in February that it would issue 500-1,000 dog-friendly permits to local eateries in mid-June.

Hong Kong leader John Lee announced the plan to relax an outdated policy banning dogs in restaurants in his 2025 Policy Address in September.

The announcement to update the decades-old Food Business Regulation came after a pet-friendly restaurant in Tai Po had to suspend operations for seven days in January last year for allowing dogs inside.

Hong Kong’s competition watchdog has announced that it is considering criminalising bid-rigging, proposing a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.

Barrister Jat Sew-tong, chairperson of the Competition Commission, announced on Friday plans to amend the Competition Ordinance to criminalise bid-rigging, local media reported.

The commission hopes to table the amendment by the end of this year, Jat said, adding that the proposed maximum penalty would be seven years in jail.

Under the Competition Ordinance, bid-rigging is currently a civil violation, not a criminal offence, and it is penalised with a fine.

Jat said that he had been discussing the proposal with the city’s leader John Lee and the Hong Kong Bar Association, NowTV reported.

He said Lee had conveyed “orders” or “expectations” but did not specify what.

The commission’s move comes after a deadly fire broke out at Wang Fuk Court, a residential estate in Tai Po, in November. The estate was undergoing a large-scale renovation at the time of the fire.

The blaze, which claimed 168 lives, has brought to light the widespread issue of bid-rigging and corruption in major maintenance works at residential buildings.

Residents told HKFP in February that they had suspected graft and bid-rigging in the renovation project, and had attempted to report it to authorities without any success.

Jat also said on Friday that investigations by the Competition Commission revealed triads were involved in rigging bids for many large-scale maintenance projects.

However, due to the Competition Ordinance’s limitations, the commission cannot prosecute the cases and has to transfer them to law enforcement departments.

The Competition Commission is a statutory body established under the Competition Ordinance in 2012.

Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn said in February that the city’s corruption watchdog had received multiple complaints involving bid-rigging in building maintenance works over the past five years.

The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) received 24 complaints in 2025, more than double the number in 2021, Linn said.

Chief Executive John Lee has announced that Hong Kong’s links to Central Asia will be strengthened with expanded visa-free arrangements and direct flights to Kazakhstan.

Lee was speaking to reporters in the Kazakh capital of Astana on Tuesday during an official visit with business leaders.

Hong Kong already has visa-free arrangements with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, which allow stays of between 10 and 30 days, but Lee said he hoped to extend the period to 30 days for all three countries this year.

“We and the Kazakh government both agree that this is definitely one of our goals. We have already exchanged some further information with the two governments, and everyone is working hard to work toward this target,” he said, according to RTHK.

He later told officials at a business dinner that he looked forward to a “long-term partnership and enduring friendship” between Astana and Hong Kong.

“Rich in oil and mineral resources, and rapidly developing and diversifying, Kazakhstan is a regional economic powerhouse. Hong Kong, a pivotal player in the Belt and Road Initiative, looks forward to working with Kazakhstan – with you – in creating mutual opportunities,” he said, according to a government press release.

Cathay direct flights

Meanwhile, flagship carrier Cathay Pacific announced direct flights to Almaty, the country’s largest city and former capital, on Tuesday.

The airline said flights are set to begin in the first quarter of next year.

“Central Asia is a strategically important Belt and Road region that offers ample business opportunities. As Hong Kong’s home hub carrier, Cathay has aligned interests with the HKSAR Government in strengthening our connectivity with this emerging market,” Cathay Chief Customer and Commercial Officer Lavinia Lau – who is among the visiting delegation – said, according to a Cathay press release.

Business deals

On Monday, Lee oversaw several memoranda of understanding signed at the capital’s Astana Hub – an innovation and tech hub.

Agreements were inked between Hong Kong’s Belt and Road Office and Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development, as well as deals between the Astana Hub and Cyberport, Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks and the Hong Kong-Shenzhen Innovation and Technology Park.

An agreement between InvestHK and the Astana International Financial Centre was also signed, RTHK reported.

Lee will visit Astana’s Nazarbayev University on Wednesday to strengthen collaboration with Hong Kong universities. He will then travel on to Uzbekistan.

Kazakhstan is Hong Kong’s largest trading partner in Central Asia.

It has seen strong GDP growth in recent years and a stable unemployment rate in recent years, with minerals, agriculture and hydrocarbons being key exports.

However, it has struggled with double-digit inflation, currency stability and severe social inequality, according to the US International Trade Administration. It is ranked 96th out of 182 countries evaluated in Transparency International’s latest Corruption Perceptions Index. Hong Kong sits at 12, whilst China sits at 76.

According to the Astana Times, Kazakhstan’s top trade partner is China, with trade reaching US$13.2 billion (HK$103.4 billion). Beijing imports huge quantities of minerals from the Central Asian country and has developed a trade corridor across the region.

The Belt and Road Initiative is a hallmark economic strategy proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, seeking to link China to Europe and Africa through a land “belt” and a maritime “Silk Road.” Since its announcement in 2013, China has spent billions of dollars developing trade links and building infrastructure in countries across central and southern Asia.

It’s doubly exciting to see that Chief Executive John Lee is launching a public consultation for Hong Kong’s inaugural five-year plan.

The first reason for excitement is that we’ve just experienced a pretty well-run public consultation; the recently updated Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan generated a lot of submissions from NGOs, companies, and members of the public.

The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) seems to have done a good job of taking those submissions into account. In short, we’ve seen a proof of concept that public consultations seem to be effective.

The second reason for excitement is that China takes sustainability quite seriously in both word and deed. In aligning with China, the Hong Kong government has a golden opportunity to step up its sustainability game.

The outline of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan is 83 pages long. However, just as a very rough indicator of how seriously the topic is taken, Article 1, Chapter 1, Section 1 includes several comments about the energy transition and pollution.

Sustainability is considered important enough a topic to warrant some space in the prime real estate of those first few paragraphs, rubbing shoulders with big hitters like GDP and life expectancy. 

It might not be very scientific to measure a topic’s importance by which paragraph it lies in, but it is incredibly refreshing to see sustainability topics getting headline treatment instead of being tucked away on page 18.

In a similar vein, the top number in the Key Indicators of Economic and Social Development is GDP. However, in that very same table, there are binding objectives for carbon intensity goals, PM2.5 levels, and forest cover.

I get the sense that these are not just handwaved in order to hit a game of buzzword bingo – something that corporations are frequently guilty of. Rigorous thought has been put into integrating sustainability into the Five-Year Plan.

At the April 21 press conference, when Lee talked about the public consultation for the five-year plan, sustainability, carbon and pollution were not mentioned at all. Of course, GDP growth and the perennial issues of housing and education are all vital issues that need to be addressed.

However, if we’re talking in terms of five-year plans, it’s probably worth noting that in five years from now, the world needs to have carbon emissions at half of what they are today. And that in 25 years from now – just five more five-year plans away! – we need to be at net zero. Sustainability is vital too.

Of course, Hong Kong’s tiny landmass is not home to vast factories, refineries or farms. Most of the carbon that we emit is from producing electricity to power the towers that are our homes and offices.

So while emulating the priority that sustainability is afforded in China’s five-year plan is important, copy-pasting it wholesale would miss important nuance: that Hong Kong’s carbon shadow is much larger than our territorial footprint.

We import almost everything – food, energy, goods, and even water. The spectre of our carbon emissions haunts not only what we consume, but also the vast amounts of financing that flow across the world from our international financial centre.

Sustainability in Hong Kong is not just about plonking a few solar panels down; it’s a much deeper question about consumption and green finance.

That’s not to diminish the role of sustainability in our own territory; there’s plenty of room for more ambition, not just in carbon but with other forms of pollution.

For example, the Municipal Solid Waste charging scheme’s failure to progress beyond the pilot study means that there’s little push to reduce waste at source.

While it’s true that landfill rates are going down, incineration is going up – in other words, the generation of trash is not slowing down, but is instead just being diverted to the landfill in the sky. That’s not a long-term solution.

I hasten to add that putting sustainability higher on the agenda is not just important for the Hong Kong government. Company boards and executive teams ought to be discussing sustainability during their strategy meetings.

Hopefully, seeing sustainability high on the agenda in the government’s five-year plan will light a fire under corporations to up their sustainability game too.

All told, the idea of a public consultation for Hong Kong’s five-year plan is a wonderful opportunity. Public consultations have a prior form in moving the needle – the Biodiversity Strategy Action Plan has demonstrated that.

And by aligning Hong Kong’s five-year plan with China’s, we can achieve one of the most important things of all – putting sustainability on the agenda.