appConfigEntityId

bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

isVideo

articlePageQuery

article

articleSchemaContent

content

hooksArticlePageAdvertisementConfigArticle

hooksArticlePageFloatingButtonConfigArticle

appConfig

filter

json

liveArticle

Alice Wu

To err is human. But when an error funnels through a system that has safeguards, the error is supposed to be caught and rectified. Checks and balances are written into the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini constitution.
Hong Kong has an executive-led system, which means it is the executive branch’s job to formulate and implement policies, as well as “draft and introduce bills, motions and subordinate legislation”. The legislature’s job is “to enact, amend or repeal laws”.
Therefore, lawmakers are the gatekeepers when it comes to ensuring the laws they enact are good, not only in spirit but in the letter of the law. Regardless of intentions, legislation must be worded correctly, at the very least.
So what has transpired over something as simple as requiring people to wear seat belts on buses proves that neither the government nor the legislature have performed their jobs. The interlocking wheels that are supposed to be the built-in system of checks and balances failed.
Some bring up the not-so-good old days when obstructionists prevented the wheels from moving with their disruptive and stalling antics. As a result, the city suffered, unable to move forward, straight-jacketed by confrontational politics as long-standing and deep-seated problems remained unresolved.
Former Legco president Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen – the first to take the helm of the “improved” legislature and who was also there through the legislature’s transition from dysfunctional to what is hoped is a better system – expressed pride in what the seventh Legislative Council achieved, measured by its output – productivity and efficiency.

But not so fast. The bus seat belt U-turn fiasco must have broken some records too – a mere six days in effect before the government announced its repeal.
Politicians like Michael Tien Puk-sun, who helped pass the legislation and took responsibility for it, revealed a bit more about how the unfathomable could happen.
First, it was rushed and done by way of the negative vetting procedure, where the subsidiary legislation is gazetted and then vetted by lawmakers, no doubt for expediency. This is generally used for non-contentious items.
Second, it was bundled with regulating the quantity, size and position of mobile phones allowed to be placed in front of drivers. At least according to Tien, there were too many items on the same plate.

The “error” that resulted in one of the most embarrassing moments for the current administration hinges on the “grandfather clause” written into the law, which meant that the law only applies to buses that hit the road after a certain date – a ludicrous situation that would have required passengers to figure out when the bus they were boarding came into operation, when all they should be figuring out is how to get from point A to point B.
The government didn’t overturn the law because of complaints and issues faced by passengers. They overturned it because it was badly written. Lawmakers, for expediency, failed in performing their basic job of spotting the problem.
This results-oriented, streamlining fixation that has permeated the political air has to stop. Focusing on these numbers for efficiency’s sake has revealed that accomplishing efficiency has meant sacrificing quality. One wonders whether other bad laws have been passed under the tyranny of checking off key performance indicators?
We don’t ask for a “perfect” piece of legislation from the secretary for transport and logistics. We ask for common sense and basic competence.

Some things just can’t be rushed, especially if they are to work together. Maybe lawmakers feel they are not allowed to say “wait a minute, what is this?” without fearing they will be seen as slowing the process.
Even if the government could churn out perfectly drafted laws, legislators should still be allowed time to scrutinise them. There should be no fear in performing one’s constitutional duty. Due respect must be given to processes, and that cannot be done unless one understands what’s going on. Even that is being called into question now.
According to scholar Lau Siu-kai, Beijing has taken notice and isn’t happy about it. Why would they be? A seemingly no-brainer policy that is good for the people shouldn’t have made headlines like this.
We must also ask whether the government is capable of finding and weeding out the systemic ills that contributed to the Tai Po blaze tragedy. We are all watching how the administration deals with the aftermath of the bottled water and seat belt fiascos, too.


Tung Chee-hwa’s legacy helps lay foundations for better tomorrows

‘His love for Hong Kong was profound’: Tung Chee-hwa honoured at state funeral

Hong Kong’s first chief executive Tung Chee-hwa honoured with state funeral

US Congress investigates diversion of sensitive F-35 parts to Hong Kong: report

Hong Kong politics

Bus seat belt fiasco proves good governance requires more than efficiency

The Legislative Council Complex in Admiralty on January 7. Photo: Eugene Lee

Then Legco member Michael Tien (centre) attends a photo session at the Legislative Council Complex on December 9, 2025. Photo: Sam Tsang

Passengers wear seat belts on a bus in Sham Shui Po on January 29. Photo: Sam Tsang

Secretary for Transport and Logistics Mable Chan Mei-po meets the press on the second floor of the Legislative Council Complex on January 30. Photo: Karma Lo

Seat belt U-turn in Hong Kong another case of ill-fitting policy

People wear seat belts on a double-decker bus in Sham Shui Po on January 29 to comply with new rules that are now being suspended. Photo: Sam Tsang

Piles of recycled plastic bottles placed in Green@Community at Sham Shui Po for recycling on January 9. Photo: Jelly Tse

Valuable lessons to be learnt from U-turn on seat belt law in Hong Kong

A sign on a Hong Kong bus reminds passengers to buckle up. On January 30, the government said it would repeal the law on the seat belt requirement to address its deficiencies, five days after the law took effect. Photo: Dickson Lee

Hong Kong authorities repeal ‘flawed’ bus seat belt law

The seat belt rules had sparked complaints over uncomfortable restraints, hygiene risks and fears that unbuckling before alighting would violate the law. Photo: Sam Tsang

Transport chief Mable Chan says a public consultation will be launched to get public views on seat belt rules for bus passengers. Photo: Karma Lo

Bottled water scandal should prompt civil servants to exercise due diligence

Xin Ding Xin Trade, which had been awarded a contract for supplying bottled water to some government offices, was found to have used fraudulent documents to secure the tender. Photo: Dickson Lee

Opinion

Hong Kong Opinion

News

World

Hong Kong

Politics

Transport

Law and Crime

Society

Even if the government drafted perfect laws, lawmakers must scrutinise them without being afraid of performing their constitutional duty


Even if the government drafted perfect laws, lawmakers must scrutinise them without being afraid of performing their constitutional duty.


Legislative Council of Hong Kong (Legco)

Hong Kong Basic Law

Hong Kong transport

Hong Kong society

China

Lau Siu-kai

Michael Tien Puk-sun

Expresses the views, ideas and conclusions of the author. (Eg. Enough of Crazy Rich Asians, think of crazy poor Hongkongers.)


Bus seat belt fiasco proves good governance requires more than efficiency

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Even if the government drafted perfect laws, lawmakers must scrutinise them without being afraid of performing their constitutional duty

Even if the government drafted perfect laws, lawmakers must scrutinise them without being afraid of performing their constitutional duty