Asia's World (non-English speaking) City

Some years ago, following a continuing series of "bleats" from me about the falling standards of English in Hong Kong, I was publicly taken to task by Jake van der Kamp in his South China Morning Post "Monitor" column for being a non-Cantonese speaker who was out of touch with reality. This was closely followed by a comment from a previous Swire Taipan who confirmed, publicly, that in his opinion the standard of English in Hong Kong was actually fine. He changed his mind, although very much less publicly, when his Cathay Pacific subsidiary tried to hire cabin crew from Hong Kong with acceptable levels of English language skill, and could hardly find any.
Fast forward to today and the news of the Hong Kong English language examination results, just published. They do not make good reading but, as usual, rather than agreeing something needs to be done, we are given the latest crop of excuses. I am sorry, but it is not acceptable to say that the reason for the drop in pass rate percentages is due to the fact that numbers of students taking the exam have increased. If this is the case, then if the population grows to the levels recently suggested by Government the pass rate percentage is going to spiral downwards. Also, this is not a one-year decline in the percentage pass, but the third decline in a row. And you only have to travel around Asia, particularly South East Asia, to discover that standards of English are higher elsewhere.
Let me be clear. Hong Kong is a city in China, with some wonderfully unique attributes. It must ensure, first and foremost, that it has proficiency in its mother tongue(s) - Cantonese and Putonghua. No argument there. But it is a world-class player in the financial markets, for example - where English is an important component - and is a market where we express a wish to remain dominant. It has also decided to brand itself "Asia's World City". No argument there either, with the concept, but does this not convey to the reader that when they arrive in Hong Kong they can expect to understand what is being said and for people to understand what they are saying? 

I am not asking for everything to be dropped in favour of English - but if we set out our stall on the basis of "English spoken here", then shouldn't we try to live up to the promise? I know many of our teachers don't like the idea of English proficiency exams for themselves, but this is where English proficiency must start. If the teachers cannot pass a test themselves, how can they expect to teach English as a language to our future leaders? Government has a responsibility to ensure the future of Hong Kong is in safe hands. If we want to be "Asia's non-English speaking world City" then say so, and let's aim for that - but I think we have greater aspirations.