Dear Colleagues,

An Improving Hong Kong Civil Service

In my first letter to you dated 1 August 2000, I said I earnestly believe that in terms of integrity, efficiency and public commitment, our Civil Service is among the best in the world. I am therefore pleased to note from recent press reports that according to the Asian Intelligence Report published by the Political & Economic Risk Consultancy Ltd, the Hong Kong Civil Service is rated the least bureaucratic in 2001 among 14 places, including the US, Australia, Japan and Singapore. On a scale of zero to 10, with zero being the best grade possible, Hong Kong emerged with a top score of 3.29, as compared with 4.0 last year and 4.61 in 1999.

I have read through the survey Report which contains a lot of interesting observations and comments not fully covered by the press. With the permission of the publisher, I would like to share with you the following excerpts :

• There is probably not a country in the world where residents are not critical of their civil service.

• It is unfair, however, to speak of bureaucracies only in critical terms. Regulations can serve a positive purpose, and enforcement of the rules is an important component of a civil society, helping to maintain order, reducing the risk of abuses, and ensuring that certain standards are adhered to. At their best, civil servants help to preserve institutional integrity and provide a consistency in policy implementation.

• Pay is clearly an important variable determining the quality of a civil service. It is not how much money civil servants make, however, but how they make their money. In societies where the official pay of civil servants is quite high, for example in Hong Kong and Singapore, there is at least the perception of greater efficiency and less corruption.

• Another dimension is how economically developed a country is and how open its government is to criticism. Australia and Hong Kong are good examples of where income levels are higher and people do not really worry about being critical in their remarks or about challenging decisions of civil servants.

• Hong Kong is probably the best example (of governments that are really aggressive in engaging the public in the search for ways to improve the way civil servants can do their jobs). Government secretaries personally write to business chambers and other private sector groups inviting suggestions for enhancing "Government support for the commercial and industrial sectors in Hong Kong".

• The average Hong Kong resident or businessman does not encounter civil servants with great regularity. There are the Immigration counters at the airport, where the lines are much shorter than they were at the old Kai Tak Airport and local residents are given especially favourable treatment. When people have to get their Hong Kong identification cards, the process is much quicker than it used to be. The same goes for getting a driver's licence. Businesses have also noted an improvement in recent years. One banker we interviewed, for example, said it took his bank only five months to have its branch licence approved. The bank was expecting it would take a year. A provisional licensing system for food premises has been introduced whereby operators can start operation pending the issue of a full licence, and retrieval of approved building plans for examination now takes four days instead of 30 days previously.

• Interestingly, local Hong Kong civil servants have no trouble coming up with specific criticisms about how things could be done better.

• Hong Kong has a reputation for being a place that works. One of the main reasons for this image is not only the efficient private sector but also the relatively competent manner that civil servants go about their jobs. In general, they are accessible to the public. They have well defined job descriptions. They are competent. And they are not usually corrupt.
  

The purpose of this letter is not to give ourselves a pat on the back and then rest on our laurels. I note with concern that businessmen interviewed in the survey complained about the deteriorating standard of English in the Hong Kong civil service. This is an area which the Civil Service Bureau will look into assiduously in the context of upgrading our training and development programmes for all civil servants. I hope to revert to the subject in the near future.

Civil servants are paid from the public purse. We owe it to the public to do a good job. Nevertheless, it is reassuring to learn that our performance is being recognised as amongst the best in the Asia Pacific region. This should provide us with the added impetus to do even better in the days to come.

Finally, I take this opportunity to remind you that there will be an exhibition by the 20 finalist teams in the "Quality Service Enhancement Award" programme organised by the Civil Service Bureau at the Exhibition Hall of City Hall Low Block this weekend, i.e. 3 to 4 March. Do come and visit the booths which may include your department's. You may wish to bring your families and friends along so that they will have a better appreciation of the dedication and quality of our Civil Service.

Yours sincerely,

(Joseph W P Wong)
Secretary for the Civil Service