It’s a fracturing subject: will the GBA’s success mean impoverishing the principle that guarantees autonomy for Macau and Hong Kong? Opinions are divided, but there are even those who see this GBA idea as a way to prepare for post-2047 and 2049.
MB October Special Report | GBA: Greater Expectations
Economist Intelligence Unit officials wrote this in the first reaction to the Plan’s release in February: ‘The SAR Governments will find it difficult to deepen regulatory convergence in a way that would produce more seamless integration, as doing so would alter the nature of their One-country, two-systems form of governance.’
Some weeks later, the Economist returned to the subject, to state that ‘local governments will gradually put flesh on the bones of the proposal. As they do so, the Plan may eventually form the basis of the post-2047 settlement once Hong Kong’s current governance arrangements under the ‘One country, two systems’ formula expire.’
The same report argues that ‘unfortunately, it is difficult at present to see either how the Hong Kong authorities will be able to convince residents of the merits of deeper integration, or how regulatory convergence can occur without damaging the territory’s business environment.’
The report – The Greater Bay Area: the shape of things to come? – cites an example.
‘Notably, they will have to overcome the fiscal divide,’ it observes. ‘Hong Kong’s [and Macau’s] income tax rates are a fraction of those in China, so living in China currently leads to much higher tax bills for Hong Kong permanent residents. They will also have to overcome deep levels of antipathy towards the Mainland authorities (particularly among young people) and a vast gap in living standards. Public services in Hong Kong are of a much higher quality than those on offer in Guangdong.’
Resistance is not only evident in Hong Kong, where Fitch anticipates ‘a rising likelihood of large-scale, sustained demonstrations against the GBA as implementation progresses and a hardening of separatist sentiment – but expect the authorities to nonetheless maintain order and control.’
A survey conducted by the University of Macau last June found that most Macau resident respondents are not willing to work or live in other cities in the GBA or in Hong Kong, citing ‘unsuitable lifestyle’. Only 37.9 per cent of respondents said they are willing to work or live in the GBA, mainly because of better career prospects, results that are in line with last year’s as a result of a survey conducted by the Macau Media Research Centre of the University of Science and Technology.
Moreover, less than half of the respondents are willing to retire to GBA cities, especially for residents aged 55 or above, who said that they do not want to spend their twilight years there.
However, not all perspectives are pessimistic.
And while those coming from within China are clearly laudatory about the future of integrating the two SARs into the process, there are also those who, in academia and without ethnic connection to China, predict a bright future.
“Based upon the central government’s plan for GBA I don’t see the GBA degrading Hong Kong and Macau’s distinct way of life,” Tim Summers, adjunct Assistant Professor at the Centre for China Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, told Macau Business. “On the contrary, the idea of ‘One country, two systems’ is clearly embedded in the GBA outline plan, and the goal seems to be to use the distinctive comparative advantages of the two SARs to enhance the overall competitiveness of the GBA . . . I don’t think that the GBA project is designed to ‘absorb the two SARs into one country’ as you put it.”
This senior consulting fellow on the Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House understands that the goal “is to develop further this part of China as a globally competitive and higher value added part of the world economy” and he summarises the question to Macau Business as follows:
”Rather than integration, the goal is greater connectivity of Hong Kong and Macau with the rest of the GBA, although this is, of course, not a new phenomenon or new objective – it has been developing since the 1980s.”
What the Plan says
‘Support the integration of Hong Kong and Macau into the development of the country; enhance the wellbeing of Hong Kong and Macau compatriots; maintain the long-term prosperity and stability of Hong Kong and Macau; and enable compatriots in Hong Kong and Macau to share with the people in the motherland both the historic responsibility of national rejuvenation and the pride of a strong and prosperous motherland’
Shenzhen, the capital
In August, the Chinese Communist Party’s central committee and the State Council presented guidelines intended to ‘push’ the connection between the Shenzhen financial market and the markets in Hong Kong and Macau.
The Chinese Government indicated that it would support financial products and funds recognised by Shenzhen and the two Special Administrative Regions while pushing the RMB liberalisation, as well as exploring innovative cross-border financial management.
According to state media, China plans to let Shenzhen play ‘a key role’ in science and technology innovation in the GBA.
This update of plans originally launched in February, and specifically for Shenzhen, can hardly be dissociated from the clashes between protesters and authorities that began in June in Hong Kong.