by Li Ping

After Ho Iat-seng, the Chief Executive of Macao, announced the Macanese could choose one from the three COVID vaccines, Carrie Lam didn’t want to be left behind and announced the Hongkongers would also be able to choose theirs. But she was so reluctant to do so she added limitations by saying, “however, it doesn’t mean people can choose at any time in any place.”

Lam even demanded the media send out accurate messages to the public and not “politicize” the vaccines’ origin. But even the epidemic prevention expert in Shanghai admitted that comparing the Chinese and imported vaccines is like comparing the Chinese and imported cars. He also suggested the senior officials in the central government should be first to take the vaccines. Although if Lam and the senior officials set an example to be the first to take the vaccines, they can still not regain the trust the government lost from the Hongkongers or build up their confidence in the vaccines.

Since when has Macao become the role model for Hong Kong? Hong Kong needed to learn from Macao and give all the citizens money to help them out of difficulties. Now Hong Kong needs to learn from Macao to let the citizens choose vaccines. Both Chief Executives were elected by a small circle of people. But Lam, who claimed herself to be very competent, is so very poor. Those close to the CCP have recently criticized Lam for doing a bad job in fighting the pandemic; they even said that was why her trip to Beijing to report her work being postponed. If that is true, she might have dragged Ho Iat-seng down as the two Chief Executives have always traveled to Beijing together to report their work. If Beijing let Ho travel alone, it would be like the CCP abandoning Lam publicly. It is a sorry sight comparing to October 2018, when Lam stood shoulder to shoulder with Xi Jinping at the opening ceremony of the HK-Zhuhai-Macao (HZM) Bridge, in front of Han Zheng, Standing Committee member of the Political Bureau, and Fernando Chui, the then Chief Executive of Macao.

Hong Kong’s superiority over Macao was not due to its Chief Executive being favored by the CCP leader, but because of its status as an international financial center, and the freedom and rule of law it had, which helped to support its international status. Macao having legislated Article 23 of the Basic Law had caused hardly any reaction from the international society because Macao did not have the international status and political foundation like Hong Kong. What ironic is that Macao has become the model example of the CCP’s “one country, two systems” implementation, and Hong Kong became a counter-example. Hong Kong has been ordered to learn from Macao, not only politically but also in the economy and fighting against the pandemic.

More ironic is that Lam kept getting the experts involved to demonstrate how right her decisions were. Even when she promoted the vaccines, she used them as her background props. The experts have been so loyal to Lam despite her repeatedly rejected their suggestions such as closing the border, increasing the testing on ship crews, limiting citizens’ social activities, etc. Some experts from the mainland were more outspoken in comparison.

When Zhang Wenhong, an epidemic prevention expert from Shanghai and Director of the Department of Infectious Diseases at Huashan Hospital affiliated to Fudan University, was asked in September this year whether to choose China-made or imported vaccines, he said, “if you think China made vaccines are of bad quality, then you are not questioning me but China’s National Medical Products Administration (NMPA). It is as if you are asking me: is our country’s NMPA reliable?” Then he asked, “if you can differentiate China-made and imported cars, why not the vaccines?”

Lam said not to “politicize” the origin of vaccines bought by the government as the most important is their safety and quality, not where they came from. However, reliable control from the origin’s government guarantees the vaccine’s safety and quality. How can we ignore the political quality of the officials from the origin’s government?

Recently, another comment on vaccines from Dr. Zhang has gone viral. He said, “who should first get the (vaccine) injection? Personally, I think the leaders should...why did I say that? Because it doesn’t matter if we ordinary people get COVID-19, but it would be scandalous if our leaders get infected...who has the highest risk in this situation? I will let you decide for yourself.”

Judging by the popularity Lam and her highly-paid officials have among people nowadays, even if they take the lead to get China made vaccine injection, it would not increase the people’s confidence in the vaccine, especially when they are China made, just like when they went on the street in May doing petitions to support the implementation of Hong Kong national security law. The thing is, what Hongkongers want to have a choice of is the Chief Executive, not the vaccine. But not only has the CCP stripped Hongkongers of the rights of choosing the Chief Executive, but also the Legislative Council lawmakers and District Councilors. How dare a non-people-elected government that disqualifies people-elected lawmakers decides our health and future? From CY Leung’s chaotic era to Lam’s crisis-era, Hongkongers always have the same mentality: we will risk everything if we could have a choice.

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play