Final Submission to the PSB Review

Dear Sir,

I would like to reiterate what I've said during the public consultation on September 30th held in the City University for your information and consideration.

Firstly, I hold my view that your review of Public Service Broadcasting/Broadcaster (PSB) is NOT timely because the RTHK has been and is running more or less smoothly hitherto. Given her reasonable audience proportion and her basical independency from editorial censorship or pressures from the Goverment (noted Mr. CHU Pui-hing, the Director of Broadcast has reiterated a similar remark on serveral occassions), your current review simply give the public a misconception that the RTHK is subjected either to some sort of government reformation and even rectification. I thank Dr. LEUNG Tin-wai for clarifying on September 30th, 2006 that the review in question is basically independent of RTHK and your committee has NEVER intended or identified RTHK as the prospective future Public Service Broadcaster. Nevertheless, most people known to me including myself have had the impression and understanding that your review is targetted at RTHK for her prospective reform.

Secondly, HKSAR is going through her early stages of transitions under the One-Country-Two-System jurisdiction, any major government reshuffle or policy review should be done with a reasonable degree of caution and goodwill to bridge HK's link to our motherland, China. Equally important is that there are quite a lot of public reviews under way and in progress, e.g. the proposal of General Services Taxes, Public Consultation on Proposed Constituency Boundaries for the 2007 District Council Election, Consultation Document on Further Development of the Political Appointment System, etc. Indeed, there are still ongoing discussions on Helping the Disadvantaged Groups and Financing Public Health Care. Such a great recipe of consultation and discussion is really too substantive and too heavy for the general public to digest and deliberate. It follows that a speedy and hurried consultation as yours would certainly leave most valued public opinions in the dark!

Thirdly, our Chief Executive of the HKSAR will have his term due on next July and a re-nomination and election will be done pretty soon early next year. It is really difficult and unfair for any politician with the mature and futuristic mind to settle on your review recommendations within our existing CE's term. Otherwise, the next CE (no matter who he/she is) will be stripped off the volition to spell out and decide on such an important matter as the constitution and interaction with your proposed future PSB.

Fourthly, I do not agree with you that your proposed set-up and running of the future PSB is entirely independent and non-interferring with the Private Broadcasters. After all, your chairman, Mr. Raymond Wong is right to point out on September 30th that our "Cake" is really limited. In a way, you are proposing setting up a PSB by essentially public funding (i.e. government money) and whose running is free from the fear of brankruptcy or the usual commercial constraints. Such a situation would give the PSB an unfair competitive edge and advantage over the other competitors especailly noting that some of our private radio operators have already been running their business under a very heavy financial risk.

Fifthly, I suggest if any PSB is at all installed through your suggestion, the RTHK, as it is, should remain operating for a reasonable tenure (5-10 years, say). This is to facilitate a gradual transition of the existing RTHK set-up to the proposed future set-up. Also, competition by the fair and effective counterparts suits well with Sir Donald's advocation of small government in a great market economy. This also give the public a fair and balanced chance to test out your "theories" that HKSAR really need something NEW as your proposed PSB and it is to be BETTER than the existing RTHK!

Lastly but not least, should RTHK be somehow chosen or accepted as the future PSB (or her predecessor), there must be clear clarification and guideline for the other existing government departments serving as a frontline public service WHY they should or should NOT be given the same and fair chance to "go public" or corporatized because they share many similar claims of bureacratic bondage as those of our existing RTHK.

For your kind and professional attention and action, please.

Your sincerely,

Howard Lai,
Independent Observer.