Under British rule, corruption in Hong Kong got out of hand. In the 1970s a senior police officer was discovered to have hundreds of thousands of dollars stashed in bank accounts around the world. When called to account, he simply hopped a plane to London to what would have been the end of the story.
But the people of Hong Kong wanted better. So an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) was formed that reported directly to the governor. It was a difficult task, but it eventually resulted in Hong Kong, 40 years later, being widely regarded as the least corrupt city in the world.
Now that the British are gone, the ICAC reports to the Communist Chinese government in Beijing.
Whereas even a 3rd rate mayor in the United States expects a solid stream of income for himself and his, and a young politician, like Paul Ryan, who has otherwise never worked in the private sector, is also a millionaire, life is dicey for the corrupt in Hong Kong. Ryan credits his personal integrity for his success.
One aspect of the ICAC rules is anyone in public office who appears to have assets incommensurate with income is presumed guilty of corruption and dealt with accordingly. Whereas even low level decision makers in USA government are "upgraded" when travelling to millionaire style vacations, in Hong Kong that could result in jail time, while you prove you did pay for it and could afford it.
I would say the ICAC goes too far when it investigates private companies. I've been privy to family arguments in which threats of calling in the ICAC are thrown around. Whereas this is unlikely, in fact the ICAC does intervene in free market corruption when it is likely not necessary.
For example, a famous contretemps erupted when the newspaper Hong Kong Standard was caught by the ICAC falsifying its circulation numbers, which in turn is in effect stealing from advertisers who pay based on circulation numbers. Such falsification is widespread in USA.
In the case of the Hong Kong Standard, a couple of mid-level managers were prosecuted, but surely after being exposed by the ICAC the ICAC could have simply stepped back and let the Hong Kong Standard's customers exact a penalty agreeable to all parties. Contemplating prosecuting the owner and throwing a couple of midlevels in the slam hardly addresses the issue.
And finally, Hong Kong is one of the freest economies in the world, and one of the cleanest. It has a government, an exceedingly weak one, that became quite corrupt. Nothing new there, as far as governments go. It took an independent commission to clean Hong Kong up. It took an outraged populace to force the clean-up. If your government is corrupt, don't blame the government.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
But the people of Hong Kong wanted better. So an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) was formed that reported directly to the governor. It was a difficult task, but it eventually resulted in Hong Kong, 40 years later, being widely regarded as the least corrupt city in the world.
Now that the British are gone, the ICAC reports to the Communist Chinese government in Beijing.
Whereas even a 3rd rate mayor in the United States expects a solid stream of income for himself and his, and a young politician, like Paul Ryan, who has otherwise never worked in the private sector, is also a millionaire, life is dicey for the corrupt in Hong Kong. Ryan credits his personal integrity for his success.
One aspect of the ICAC rules is anyone in public office who appears to have assets incommensurate with income is presumed guilty of corruption and dealt with accordingly. Whereas even low level decision makers in USA government are "upgraded" when travelling to millionaire style vacations, in Hong Kong that could result in jail time, while you prove you did pay for it and could afford it.
I would say the ICAC goes too far when it investigates private companies. I've been privy to family arguments in which threats of calling in the ICAC are thrown around. Whereas this is unlikely, in fact the ICAC does intervene in free market corruption when it is likely not necessary.
For example, a famous contretemps erupted when the newspaper Hong Kong Standard was caught by the ICAC falsifying its circulation numbers, which in turn is in effect stealing from advertisers who pay based on circulation numbers. Such falsification is widespread in USA.
In the case of the Hong Kong Standard, a couple of mid-level managers were prosecuted, but surely after being exposed by the ICAC the ICAC could have simply stepped back and let the Hong Kong Standard's customers exact a penalty agreeable to all parties. Contemplating prosecuting the owner and throwing a couple of midlevels in the slam hardly addresses the issue.
And finally, Hong Kong is one of the freest economies in the world, and one of the cleanest. It has a government, an exceedingly weak one, that became quite corrupt. Nothing new there, as far as governments go. It took an independent commission to clean Hong Kong up. It took an outraged populace to force the clean-up. If your government is corrupt, don't blame the government.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
1 comments:
Having previously being involved with monthly and daily publications. I am well aware of the falsification of circulation numbers.
Post a Comment