Letters from leaders of Hong Kong's political parties and government departments.

    Letter To Hong Kong



    Leaders from Hong Kong's political parties and government departments take their turn to have their say.

    Catch it live:
    Sunday 8:15am - 8:25am

    Podcast: Weekly update and available after its broadcast. 



    Roundtable legislator, Michael Tien

    My dear fellow citizens of Hong Kong, I woke up on a recent Thursday to watch the news. I couldn't believe my eyes. A group of demonstrators stormed the US Congress, causing many casualties. I don’t think anyone would have imagined that this country – the father of global democracy – would see such violent conflict in its core democratic sanctuary. This begs the question: how will the road to democracy go on? 

    The people of Hong Kong should feel this even more deeply, because it certainly reminds people of the scene that happened a year and a half ago, when hundreds of demonstrators charged into the Legislative Council building and vandalised it. Unfortunately the clashes at the US Congress this time resulted in casualties after police opened fire to subdue demonstrators. Some people immediately compared the two – that the US police didn’t hesitate to open fire makes the Hong Kong police’s response to demonstrators seem very restrained. Yet every country, every system…indeed, every demonstration has its own causes and characteristics. It is not wise to force comparison between different time and space. What people do in their situation does not necessarily inform if the same course of action is right or wrong for our particular circumstances. The fact that other people choose to open fire does not mean we cannot use other methods to deal with the problem. 

    There are people from another camp who saw things differently, intentionally or unintentionally rationalising the violence of Hong Kong protesters – I wouldn’t agree with them either. They said the Hong Kong demonstrators only attacked Legco when no meetings were in session, and only inanimate objects were destroyed. I don't understand why you would launch an attack on an empty building; it seems like a cowardly and reckless way to vent your anger.  Moreover, though no meetings were in session, there are still security guards and police officers. In the early days of the anti-extradition bill demonstrations, supporters of civil disobedience through destructive action believed it is acceptable to destroy things as long as people are not hurt.  Later, this escalated to throwing petrol bombs, setting fires – even to people – and attacking police officers – ostensibly out of self-defense so again, they feel these actions are justified. In the end, the violence culminated in widespread vigilantism on hapless victims holding differing views.  As long as you accept violence, there will always be reasons to escalate it until everyone suffers.  

    As to the recent attack on the US Congress building, we need to go beyond political ideologies to ponder a more far-reaching issue – what went wrong with the democratic system that is hailed as the ultimate gold standard?  Since Trump's participation in the party's primary elections, his key selling point has been his extremism. It would be no overstatement to say that his election victories verily depended on rumours and lies. Generally speaking, under a two-party system, those in power tend to take the middle ground to broaden their support base. In the past, people even joke that the only time you can differentiate between the Democratic and Republican parties is right before an election.Yet this is also one of the pros of democracy: to build consensus and resolve differences. Trump went the other way – consolidating his power by creating and intensifying conflicts and hatred. He actually succeeded in turning many into die-hard fans and planting the the seed of future destruction.  After the recent election, things went from bad to worse. Everyday he issued groundless accusations on election fraud, though almost all the lawsuits were quickly dismissed by the court. In the end, he chose to call on his supporters to surround the Congress, causing tragedy.

    Of course, we are not discussing individuals. Any madman must get popular support before he can wreak havoc. In the latest election, Trump received over 74 million popular votes, more than any successful candidates in the past, including the popular Obama — who was the previous record holder with over 69 million votes. Trump even out-did himself on the previous election by over 10 million votes! That just goes to show that his extreme strategy is not a complete failure. In today’s world where information moves at lightning speed, how is it that such an avid publisher of fake news can get so much support? In a world that touts equality for all, how is it that anyone so steeped in discrimination and hate speech can garner so much support? Well, you say… people are free to choose who they support – but in a country where elections are arguably prevalent and mature, it baffles the mind that so many would disrespect election results, reject court verdicts, and choose to express their dissatisfaction through violence.  

    The role of social media in this incident cannot be overlooked. Pre- and post- election, many of Trump's tweets were labeled as possibly false news, but clearly they still influenced many people. After the attack on Congress, his account was suspended and finally shut down, but this made some people question whether this violated another universal value: freedom of speech?  On what grounds can senior management of social media companies shut up a person?  Where is the boundary?  At the same time, in fact, many right-wing organizations that support Trump are very active online. They have been accused of brazenly posting on online platforms their plans of attack on Congress.  On the other hand, social media has been accused of their failure to respond.   

    Everyone has their own justifications. How to make good use of the promised land of the digital world and strike a balance between freedom, self-discipline, and supervision will be the key to human civilization in the future. 

    The above issues are food for thought for anyone who genuinely cares about the development of democracy. 

    24/01/2021 - 足本 Full (HKT 08:15 - 08:30)


    11 - 01
    2020 - 2021


    Roundtable legislator, Michael Tien


    Dr Alvin Chan, Council Member of Hong Kong Medical Association


    Executive Councillor Tommy Cheung


     Sin Chung-kai, the chairman of Kwai Tsing District Council


    Professor Ivan Hung


    Legislator Eunice Yung


    Clarisse Yeung, chairwoman of Wan Chai District Council


    David Wong, Chairman of Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority


    Legislator Lam Cheuk Ting

    Professor Ivan Hung

    Dear Uncle Kay


    Over the past one year, the Covid19 pandemic has affected 191 countries, with more than 75 million people infected and in excess of 1.6 million deaths. The situation was particularly bad in the United States, the country where you live. With more than 200,000 patients diagnosed every day, we can't help but worry about you! In these ten long months, Hong Kong has experienced wave after wave of outbreaks. All social and business activities were put on halt. The economy has suffered hefty losses. We are playing catch up with this very smart virus. Its mutation rate is astonishing as highlighted by the D614G mutation of the surface spike protein which greatly enhanced its transmissibility. In Hong Kong, we are currently experiencing the “fourth wave” of the outbreak, initially started by a dance cohort and have resulted in almost 2000 new cases since late November. Despite being highly contagious, the virus virulence remains unchanged as the current circulating clade was the same Nepalese clade identified late September. Most severe cases required intensive care are elderly patients with comorbidity, although a few young patients with high viral carriage who presented late to the hospitals might also presented with deterioration. The cold weather might also increase the viral replication in the nasal passage and upper respiratory tract.




    In your previous letter, you asked whether you should receive the Covid19 vaccine once available. I fully understand your doubt as this is a completely new vaccine, without long-term safety and efficacy data. With regards to the Covid19 vaccine technology, there are three main platforms. The first type is the conventional vector based vaccine, which relies on the adenovirus to deliver the spike protein genetic code into human cells, which then produce the protein and prepare the immune system to respond to a future infection. The second type is a completely new platform, using gene editing and modification technology to make messenger RNA of the coronavirus surface spike protein into the vaccine. Once injected into the human body, the immune system will recognize the translated spike protein and start producing antibody against the coronavirus. The third type is a Covid19 recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine with adjuvant, which is also a relatively new technology. In the usual circumstance, it will take 5 to 10 years for a new vaccine to develop from the laboratory to go into the market. First, the vaccine must go through animal testing, followed by a three-stage human clinical trials. The final report must be approved by the local authorities (for example the Food and Drug Safety Administration in the US) before vaccination in the human subjects. However, since the health system of many countries are close to collapse, Covid19 vaccine pharmaceuticals have been given special rights to expedite the clinical trials process, in which the US and UK have already launched the community vaccination program based on the recently published phase III vaccine trial short-term results, with reported efficacy of 95% and 70% respectively. The pharmaceuticals are also given special exemption from liability clauses with regards to adverse effects due to the vaccine. Nevertheless, the vaccine manufacturers still have to take responsibility to ensure the quality of the vaccines. Despite recent worrying reports of facial palsy after the Covid19 vaccination in a few of the trial patients, there are no evidence to suggest these adverse events were associated with the vaccine as similar incidents were also reported in the placebo group. With regards to the long-term results, we have yet to know the one-year or beyond vaccine efficacy and safety. As we previously reported of the world first case of reinfection, we understand that the antibody will drop to an undetectable level over a period of around 6 months. It is likely that similar to the influenza vaccine, annual COVID19 vaccination will be required and vigilance in infection control and face masking might still be needed.




    In view of your age and past medical history of diabetes and obesity, I would strongly recommend you to receive the vaccine once available. We learn from our past experience that elderly patients, especially those with chronic illnesses of diabetes, cardiac and pulmonary diseases, immunosuppressed hosts and cancer patients on chemotherapy are at high risks of deterioration and complication of developing of severe pneumonia upon contracting COVID19. These high risk patients should be hospitalized once they are diagnosed and should be started on a combination of antiviral treatment as soon as possible, in order to suppress the viral replication and reduce the risks of subsequent complications and pneumonia associated with the hyperinflammation phase in the second week of the infection.




    In your previous letter, you also expressed concern about whether the poorer countries will get a fair share of the vaccines. For this, you could rest assured.  The International organization COVAX will be responsible for distributing the Covid-19 vaccines fairly among different countries. The COVAX, co-led by the Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunity (GAVI), the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPi), and the World Health Organization (WHO). Its aim is to accelerate the development and manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines, and to guarantee fair and equitable access for every country in the world. The coalition hopes to provide 2.1 billion doses of safe and effective vaccines in 2021, and to distribute them to all COVAX participating countries fairly according to the population, so as to provide a certain degree of safety net for poor countries.




    At the University of Hong Kong, we have developed an intranasal COVID19 vaccine based on an influenza vaccine platform. Hopefully, we will be able to kick start the phase 1 clinical trial on this vaccine early next year. If successful, we will be able to proceed to Phase 3 clinical trial later next year globally. This vaccine has the potential of conferring local immunity at the nasal passage and could combine the seasonal flu and Covid19 as a single vaccine to be given annually. 




    Hopefully, the universal COVID19 vaccination coupled with the natural infection will shorten the time to achieve herd immunity globally, so that social, economic and traveling activities could be resumed. I look forward to visiting you in San Francisco next year. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.




    Warmest regards




    20/12/2020 - 足本 Full (HKT 08:15 - 08:25)

    • 網站獲奬:

    • 在新分頁開啟第五屆傳媒轉型大獎
    • 在新分頁開啟2014優秀網站選舉十大優秀網站