Clear way for CEPA ride

The Hong Kong SAR signed the 10th Supplementary Agreement of the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA) with the central government on Thursday. The additional benefits from CEPA include 73 measures aimed at expanding service trade and facilitating trade and investment between the two regions. Supplement 10 of CEPA represents deeper and wider market opening on the mainland for Hong Kong businesses and another important milestone in the progress of cross-boundary service trade liberalization as envisioned in the 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-15), which is now approaching the final stretch. The new agreement highlights Hong Kong's strengths and includes several measures comparable to those offered to Taiwan businesses in the Cross-Straits Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement signed in late June that are more favorable than existing CEPA provisions. The added supportive measures will help Hong Kong service providers explore the mainland market and boost the development of cross-boundary economic and trade cooperation between the two regions.

The central government has promised that the mainland will basically open up its vast consumer market to Hong Kong services through CEPA toward the end of the 12th Five-Year Plan and Supplement 10 of CEPA represents a big step towards the goal. The new agreement consists of 65 service trade market opening provisions and eight others designed to enhance cross-boundary financial cooperation and better facilitate trade and investment. The last two supplementary agreements (9 and 10) have brought the number of service areas from 18 to 48 with a total of 338 measures to open the mainland market wider for Hong Kong businesses in the service trade and financial industry in particular.

However, the implementation of the central government's supportive policies, measures and development projects has run into politically motivated resistance and sabotage by the opposition amid wanton politicization of anything and everything. Such destructive moves are aimed at weakening the lawful administration of the SAR government by stalling Hong Kong's economic development at the expense of local residents' livelihood as well as fueling deeper problems of Hong Kong society. The city must overcome these obstacles if it is to fully capitalize on the opportunities brought by CEPA.

This is an excerpted translation of a Wen Wei Po editorial published on Aug 30.

Patients' right to know

Kwan Chiu

A recent decision by the Hospital Authority (HA) to ban Yu Cheuk-man from doing complicated heart surgery has set off heated public debate over the reason why and whether or not the disciplinary action is appropriate or an overkill.

The fact is Professor Yu is a licensed surgeon specialized in heart surgery and teaches at the Medical School of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Even if he is not the first to be banned by the HA from operating on particularly challenging cases, such a heavy penalty is certainly very rare in Hong Kong history. It has been made more controversial than the decision by Yu's self-defense and rebuttal of the HA's reasoning to the effect that it is simply unfair. Some conspiracy theorists went so far as to claim it was a case of "premeditated character assassination", adding a layer of suspicion over the already complicated puzzle.

By all accounts heart surgery can be extremely challenging even for the most qualified professionals and layman observers had better shut up when it comes to technical details. That said, the ban is not just about someone's career. It also affects the whole medical school where Yu teaches and the management of the hospitals, public or private. Then there is the most important issue of them all - the patients' health and even lives.

As far as members of the public know, the ban was based on a joint complaint by seven colleagues of Yu's that alleges he did many heart operations despite a lack of experience in complicated procedures. As a result, 14 of the patients he operated on developed complications after their surgeries, and one died a few weeks afterwards, while another passed away less than two years later.

If these cases are true, relevant authorities should have learned about the problem over a year ago. Why did it take so long to inform the public of such a serious case of misjudgment? And why did the HA wait for months before announcing the penalty against Yu earlier this week? Did he operate on more patents in the past year or so than the complaint claims and, if yes, how did they fare after surgery?

There are many questions over the whole scandal but none matters more than the patients' safety, rights and interests. All parties concerned must focus on this issue more than any other detail in the case.

The author is a veteran in current affairs commentary. This is an excerpted translation of her column published in Ta Kung Pao on Aug 30.

The opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily. Readers' comments are welcome. Please send your e-mail to opinion@chinadailyhk.com. China Daily reserves the right to edit all letters.

(HK Edition 08/31/2013 page6)