Sometimes, just once in a while, something triggers your mind to be reminded of a morsel of history that had long been lost.
Today [14 June 2016], I rushed out of the house later than planned, in an attempt to attend a talk by Rose Webb titled ‘Implementation of the Competition Ordinance in Hong Kong’. Probably not the most fascinating talk you could have hoped for, but one that I was kinda interested in, and figured that I should try to attend seeing as I’d now left the house. Unfortunately, I arrived 10 minutes late and the talk had started (though give the size of the LMC it’s entirely possible to slip in without too many people noticing). Anyways, as the title of the talk might suggest, it was about the Competition Ordinance (Cap 619) in Hong Kong. I will not bore you with the contents of the talk, but at one point it was mentioned that some of the drafting was intended to protect SME’s from being attacked by big corporations.
Jump back to 19 April 2008, and there I was on stage in St Joseph’s College’s hall, saying these exact words “This law would harm SMEs, Small and Medium Enterprise”. (I have the text of my speech, and I assume I was accurate in regurgitating it at the time.) That debate was on the motion that ‘The government should set up a fair competition law in Hong Kong.’ I went on to say “First SMEs will be harmed in cases where large companies launch repeated complaints against SMEs”.
Being reminded of this little episode made me think about how many seemingly irrelevant, unimportant endeavors in childhood can still be relevant in ways we don’t expect. Sure the debate was unimportant, but if that memory has stuck with me since, then who knows what else about that debate has? What I do know that I opted to study Competition Law and Policy at undergraduate, and here I am sitting in a talk about competition law in Hong Kong. Perhaps life is rounder than we thought.