Kapok: Macao in a Kiangwu cup

Anybody and everybody knows the Kiang Wu Hospital in Macao. Not for its ugly architecture that scars the whole area behind the façade of Saint Paul, but rather as one of the old and most respected institutions of the SAR.

The hospital started its operations in 1871 by providing Chinese medicine only, and opened its first Western medicine section in 1892 thanks to a brilliant fresh graduate from Hong Kong, Dr Sun Yat-Sen, who later on became a great revolutionary, the theoretician of The Three Principles of the People and the father of the Republic of China. But this is not the only patronage the hospital acknowledges. Of less international repute, Ke Lin, who had been trained at the Canton Pok Tsai Hospital, started teaching at Kiang Wu Hospital and in its nursing school back in the 1930s. He later became the first Dean of the hospital. Not only was Master Ke a great medical educator, but he was also known for being one of the master spies of the Chinese Communist Party based in Macao, even becoming the one responsible for the Party’s Macao affairs during the Second Chinese Civil War of 1945-49. Ke Lin’s brother was none other than Ke Zhengping, the founder of the Nam Kwong Trading Company representing the Communist regime interests in the Portuguese colony. The Nam Kwong branched out in the 1980s as the Xinhua News Agency Macao Branch and is still everywhere to be seen today in Macao as the Nam Kwong Group.

As many institutions in Macao that started catering for the Chinese population, a not-for-profit association exercises oversight over the operations of the whole organization. Originally, the rationale was for important Chinese businessmen to be on the board to run things professionally as well as contribute financially to the smooth operation of the enterprise. One of the best examples of such a venture is the Tung Sin Tong that started operating in 1892 and still provides financial help and medicine for the poor, free education and free child care for the socially disadvantaged, and support for necessitous elderly. The association is headed today by a triumvirate made of the brother of the Chief Executive, Chui Sai Cheong, the cousin of the Chief Executive, Chui Sai Peng, and the sister of the Chief Executive-elect, Ho Teng Iat.

Given its pedigree, the Kiang Wu Hospital Charitable Association was thus bound to push the limits of a get-together of powerful benefactors to the brink of absurdity. The Chairmen for life are none other than Edmund Ho, the first Chief Executive of the SAR, Ma You-li, the son of the great patriot Ma Man-kei, and Stanley Ho, the king of gambling who just retired as chairman of SJM Holdings. Second only to these, the Chief Executive-elect himself, Ho Iat Seng, appears as the Honorary Chairman for life.

Should we then be surprised to learn that out of MOP531.3 million in financial support provided by the Health Bureau from January to September, some 86.5 per cent have been channeled to the Kiang Wu Charitable Association? In the official gazette published at the end of October, one could also read that the Association had received in July some MOP$32.5 million from the Macau Foundation, on top of the MOP$25 million received earlier in the year.
The problem with this ever-growing financing of Kiang Wu is that the money is coming from the public coffers, and thus a privately-run business is being heavily subsidized by the government in order to supplement public institutions. And who decides on that? The same people who sit on the Executive Council, the Macau Foundation board and the boards of the beneficiaries. Meanwhile, the waiting-time at the emergencies at Conde de São Januário hospital worsens.

Published in Macau Daily Times, November 8, 2019.

Kapok: Everything must change...

In The Leopard, the beautiful novel by Lampedusa set in slow-changing Sicily, Trancredi’s famous assertion that “everything must change for everything to remain the same” holds a particular truth for Macao, especially so when considering the latest urge by the Chief Executive’s family to widen its hold on power in the SAR.

When learning last week about the scheme to promote Mr Chui Sai Cheong, the Chief Executive’s brother, to the “elected” position of Vice President of the Legislative Assembly, my first reaction was one of disbelief. I had been under the impression that since May 2014, when 20,000 people took to the street against the extravagant preferential treatment senior officials were conferring to themselves, that some kind of attempt at greater adequacy between the people’s expectations and the priorities of the government — not only in speeches — would be the new normal in Macao.

One can easily perceive the lingering danger of deception: years of maladministration and substandard urban development coupled with the inept management of a tragedy that ultimately claimed 10 lives can in large part explain the remarkable results of the pan-democrats in the September 17th legislative elections. The New Macau Association-affiliated legislators made history by totalling more than 30,000 votes, and if José Pereira Coutinho and Agnes Lam are added, we are talking about a sizeable 55,000 votes and more than 40% of the elected seats. Moreover, the youngest ever elected legislator, 26-year old Sulu Sou, officially representing NMA, happens to have been the main organizer of the May 2014 protest!

Choosing a handful of academics as appointees could also be seen as a wise move on the part of the Chief Executive, and at the very least paying lip-service to the grand plan of “scientific policy-making”. Why then cast a shadow on the resolve to engage in “sunshine government”?

As reported in the press, there was quite a bit of lobbying in order to ensure the “election” of Chui Sai Cheong prior to the vote last Monday. In a way, this is reassuring as it seems to indicate that not everybody was convinced this was the best of options. If we leave aside the merits, the question of seniority does not hold as President Ho Iat Seng has himself been a member of the LA only since 2009, whereas the longest-serving legislator is Ng Kuok Cheong, a democrat. Then, if custom is to be considered, we now have two business-related legislators at the helm of the LA, a first since the handover as these two positions have traditionally been split between labour and business pro-establishment camps. But if reticences there were, they apparently cleared out over the weekend: Mr Chui Sai Cheong received 29 votes out of 33 during the first plenary session!

Clearly, this is not illegal for Mr Chui-the-brother to become Vice President of the LA, but this is not a matter of legality — although it should be if one considers that the independence of powers is enshrined in the Basic Law, or is it really? In case of absence of the President, the Vice President presides over meetings, decides on the dates and convenes special and emergency sessions: how would that look? And the argument of smallness of Macao does not hold, as smaller cities in the world manage to extend the circles of trust beyond the family bonds. Even the Kaczyński brothers — twins! — in Poland kept their act only on the side of the executive branch.

As we are reminded by the OECD, a conflict of interest can be defined as “a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest,” and this, in turn, is “considered an indicator, a precursor and a result of corruption.” Quite a treacherous line to walk at the time of the 19th Congress further north.

Published in Macau Daily Times on October 20, 2017

Kapok: The Crux of the Matter

A week ago, HK01, a Hong Kong-based Chinese online newspaper cooperating with The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists revealed that our Chief Executive, Fernando Chui Sai On, and his legislator elder brother, Chui Sai Cheong, had been closely connected to an offshore company, Yee Shing International Limited, registered in the British Virgin Islands, for about two decades. As a subsidiary of Hopewell Holdings Limited, a major infrastructure and property firm listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange since 1972 (with revenues of HKD6.64 billion in 2015), this offshore had in effect been co-founded by Chui Sai Cheong together with a long-term executive of Hopewell.
The Chief Executive was only director of the tax-free company for two short years, starting in 1997, and resigned from his directorship on July 30th 1999, shortly before it was announced that he would become, after the December 19 handover, the new Secretary for social affairs and culture. His brother, on the contrary, was only out of Yee Shing for a short spell in 1994 and was still listed as a director in 2010 when Mossack Fonseca, the now rather infamous Panamanian law firm, lost the custody contract for the offshore. HK01 consequently wondered why this function had never been enclosed in Chui Sai Cheong’s declaration of assets, the one all senior officials are supposed to divulge since a more stringent law on such matters was passed in January 2013—more than six years after the arrest of Ao Man Long, better late than never…
Interestingly enough, both brothers came up with a public explanation, and of course these were in line with the responses aired back in April when the so-called Panama papers, of which 29 percent of offshore firms were incorporated either in Hong Kong or China, started to unravel: why the big fuss, when all this is legal?! Chui Sai Cheong gave an interview to the ever-zealous and pro-establishment Chinese newspaper Macao Daily revealing that he had actually resigned from the director position in July 2012 (spoiler!), and that he, therefore, acted in accordance with the new asset declaration law. And then, Chui Sai On’s Spokesperson’s Office made it publicly known that by resigning from all business-related positions prior to his nomination to senior public posts he had been “strictly following the Basic Law of the MSAR”. And things simply went back to normal: silence!
I already argued earlier this year that governing is not only a matter of legality, and that responsibility in politics requires slightly more than being law abiding in grey areas—and the Panama papers are raw diamonds in that respect. The time when traditional paternalistic elites could profess “do as I say and not as I do” is coming to an end, and unfortunately not necessarily pointing to a reassuring future, whatever the setting, democratic or less so—think US, the Philippines, China, etc.
What these offshore leaks have revealed for Macao is well established: paragons of virtue and patriotism, even the ones representing Macao at the CPPCC or the NPC, are the ones practising “tax evasion” on an industrial scale while holding dual nationality. But for the Chui, dysfunctions are of another nature: what is the exact purpose of holding an official position? The younger Chui resigned 12 days before being nominated Secretary and the elder Chui resigned  from Yee Shing right in the middle of the revision of the new asset declaration law (passed in 2013, but introduced in December 2011)? In finance, that would be called “insider trading”! And then what about the separation of powers: the two brothers played musical chairs in the very same business! Moreover, Chui Sai On was supposed to champion social and economic housing, both as a legislator starting in 1992 and as a Secretary afterwards, while his brother, now a legislator, was helping Hopewell ripe the full benefits of luxury real-estate programs such as Nova Taipa and then Nova City?
Promiscuity is a powerful excuse on a tiny territory that has a multi-secular tradition of opacity, but still, this is too big to go unnoticed.

Published in Macau Daily Times, September 30th 2016

Kapok: Smoke and Mirrors

Several local stakeholders, whether from the government, the civil society or of course THE industry - meaning the casino industry as they often refer to themselves - have been blowing smoke for a while regarding the measures that pave the way for a tobacco free (and therefore healthier) environment in Macao. In fact, this has been the case ever since the idea of such a new piece of legislation was aired in 2010 and the law was ultimately passed in May 2011, which, incidentally, was the same month China began enforcing a ban on smoking in public spaces, but five years after Hong Kong had passed a similar bill: holy smoke, that comes as a surprise!
The mere fact that it took a year and a half for that law to be enshrined in the official gazette serves as an indication that the pressing urge for such a tobacco control policy was far from unanimous. I routinely discuss that law with my students as an illustration for a class on “conflicts of interest,” smoking out the deceitful vested interests at play and the inner workings of a paternalist and yet clientelist political environment: after all, there is no smoke without a fire!
The composition of the Second Permanent Commission that examined the law before it was discussed and (finally) passed is rather telling. The commission is presided over by Mr Chan Chak Mo, an indirectly-elected legislator who is also the chairman of the United Association of Food and Beverage Merchants of Macao (the organizer of the shameful Macao Food Festival…) and General Manager of Future Bright, a company that operates no less than 24 restaurants and ten food courts! No wonder the law was delayed and bars, dance halls, saunas and massage parlors got a three-year reprieve and casinos a one-year exemption before having to comply for only half of their surface area! The brother of the Chief Executive, Mr Chui Sai Cheong, is also an indirectly-elected member of that commission, and so is Mr Chan Meng Kam, a directly elected casino operator, along with Mr Lee Chong Cheng, a directly elected legislator who is also the deputy director of the General Association of Workers in Macao - an association that is very vocal in defending casino workers’ rights today!
Might that be due to upcoming elections? Would that mean that things finally get discussed when competition is introduced and a pre-electoral campaign looms?
Let me parade my smoking barrels then! Sometimes things backfire, just as they did for Mrs Angela Leong, an elected legislator who can usually rely on her employees to get elected, and was so adamant about asking for a complete smoke free environment in casinos (despite the law she voted for…) that she was cornered by her own contradictions when she was confronted by challenging casino workers who suggested she should lead by example and immediately implement in the casinos she operates an absolutely smoke-free policy, instead of the “minimum 50%” required by the law! The rule of woman if not the rule of law…
The government certainly issued its regulations regarding the “less than 50%” prescription very late (October 29, 2012!), indeed, probably too late and without adequate consultation and discussion with casino operators prior to the announcement of the required instructions regarding air quality and signalization. But let’s not kid ourselves either: casino operators, all of them, are displaying an extraordinary amount of insincerity in applying the law, despite all their claims to the contrary. In all casinos I have visited since January 1, all non-smoking areas are concentrated in the most deserted parts of the premises. Isn’t “good faith,” or its contrary, legally binding somehow? Oops, another one that goes up in smoke!

Published in Macau Daily Times on January 11th 2013