By Tom Fowdy
Last week, Jimmy Lai was sentenced to twenty years in prison.
Before we move on: Lai has been convicted of treason, subversion, and collusion under Hong Kong's National Security Law. Despite the British government and press denouncing it as politically motivated, we must ask ourselves, would the owner of one of Britain's biggest tabloids be allowed to openly meet with foreign leaders of countries deemed openly hostile to the UK? Would he be allowed to intervene in British politics on behalf of that leader?
The answer speaks for itself, and neither "freedom or democracy" would influence the ultimate outcome or how it would be treated in the popular media. After all, the mass hysteria from the so-called "spy scandals" in the British media speaks for itself. Yet, in lieu of this ruling, the British government proceeded to denounce the ruling as "illegitimate", "politically motivated" and talked about "their commitment to Hong Kong," with the assumption that Britain has a right to supersede the national security interests of China in the city.
In doing so, the British government announced that it would expand the BNO scheme to include the children of BNO holders who were born before 1997. It framed this announcement in holistic and benevolent terms, framing it as Hong Kongers are begging to escape to the United Kingdom, who, in the government's words, are "fleeing persecution" and providing a "safe haven" and "sanctuary" in Britain.
The statements from the British government manifest some incredible delusions of grandeur in respect to this matter, especially in regards to their own appeal, which is created from their affirmation they are "saviours" of the city against its parent country. But none of it holds up to scrutiny. First, the UK government's numbers on this matter have always been ridiculously exaggerated. When the UK government first announced the scheme in 2020, they estimated that up to between 258,000-322,000 people would move to Britain.
The result after five years of implementation? Just 178,000, not even half their projected total. Again, they estimate another 28,000 will come to Britain as a result of this expanded scheme, but there is no reason to believe this is accurate. They believe that their ideology makes them an attractive option to Hong Kongers, and yes while British nostalgia appeals to some, the reality is on a socio-economic level, modern Britain is, and I say this as a British person, a massive step down from life in Hong Kong, and even those who have vacated the city to live in Albion realise this, with some having even returned.
Why? First of all, Britain is in a state of severe economic stagnation, GDP is minimal at best, stagnant at worst, but even despite that, the British people's incomes are, on average, shrinking. The country has been hit with years of high-level inflation. Large sections of the economy do not function correctly, in-person retail has effectively collapsed, and there has been an explosion of "shady businesses" filling up the empty high streets in the form of vape shops, Turkish barbers, and "American Candy Stores" constantly raided by police. Infrastructure is likewise deteriorating; the NHS, although free, is forced to ration healthcare as running costs exceed funding. Meanwhile, crimes such as shoplifting, phone snatching, etc., have grown to historical highs.
As someone who loves Britain very much, I find the decline of my country harrowing. Despite the surging opposition to immigration in national public opinion, Hong Kongers stand as one of the most respected groups, but I would question the logic as to why you would want to leave one of Asia's most iconic cities for a country effectively on its knees, especially when you are entering a country with high employment, where you do not easily fit in to the job market. Many of the BNOers I have met, especially those in the 20s-30s age group, are struggling indeed and trying to get by with bit-part work.
So, considering this, I believe Britain's self-proclaimed "saviour" status for the city is nonsense. The BNO scheme has always been a self-congratulatory set of false promises that is high on the iconography of our own proclaimed "heroism" for a former colony, offering the opium of freedom & democracy, but low on substance as to what kind of a better life it would actually give. They struggle to come to terms with the reality that most Hong Kongers are not in fact banging on the doors, screaming to leave to "Mother England" but that life goes on, and there is no "state of terror" over the National Security Law, that is because for its so-called love of "freedom", Britain didn't build a democracy in Hong Kong themselves, and don't let them forget that.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | How Japan's LDP uses a crisis and election playbook to stay in power perpetually
Opinion | How Lithuania came to regret its antagonism of China
Opinion | Hong Kong has shrugged off 'wishcasting' of much hoped-for decline
Comment