Community engagement

HAVING learned a lesson from what happenedin 2005, the government has adopted a totallydifferent way to consult the public aboutconstitutional reform. It has decided to have principaland bureau secretaries engage the community to drumup support. Yesterday Chief Secretary fired the firstshot. He went to a secondary school to dialogue withits teachers and students. It manifests their opennessand progressiveness for top officials to get out of thegovernment headquarters to listen to what people haveto say. Such efforts are commendable. Belilios teacherNg Mei-lan asked Henry Tang incisive questions. Shefearlessly told the top official what was in her mind. Bydoing so, she admirably demonstrated to her studentshow good citizens should behave.

The government is determined to hold forums invarious districts to urge citizens to support itsproposals in the hope that public opinion will persuademoderate democrats to switch to accepting them.

Those who are against the government's packagemay sneeze at its attempts. They may say they areonly political cosmetics - publicity designed to deceivethe public. Nevertheless, it is open to pan-democraticparties to try to engage citizens and win their supportas the government does.

Yesterday Henry Tang was a little embarrassed.

Nevertheless, that shows the Belilios gathering wasnot a show the government and the school had jointlystaged. It was therefore precious, and the governmentwould do well to continue to have such meetings.

However, it must examine its successes and failures.

For example, officials have been criticised for failing tocast their votes in the by-election. Before they try toengage the public, officials must prepare themselvesfor unexpected challenges. They must sincerelyanswer questions put to them. They can hardlypersuade people to support the government's packageif they just repeat its statements like a recorder or arerendered dumb by sudden questions.

How can one answer a question about one'sfailure to cast one's vote at the by-election? The daybefore yesterday, Rita Fan, who sits on the NationalPeople's Congress Standing Committee, gave a modelanswer. She said that, as most citizens supporteddemocracy and hoped Hong Kong would soonintroduce universal suffrage, one might think manyagreed with the objectives the two parties had putforward and the turnout should not have been so low.

She said it was clear from the outcome that manydisliked antagonising the central government andchose to cast blank votes or not to rote. Her answershows even supporters of democracy may havechosen not to vote in the by-election because theydisapproved of the de facto referendum strategy.

Therefore, failure to vote in the by-election is notfailure to do one's civic duty.

Yesterday, the Chief Secretary gave a replyinferior to Rita Fan's, but Ms Ng Mei-lan, who askedhim questions, did shine.

She fearlessly spoke her mind in the presence ofthe bigwig, questioned his commitment to fulfilling hiscivic duty and called for the election of the ChiefExecutive by universal suffrage. She gave her studentsa vivid civics lesson. By practising what she advocates,she has told her students Hong Kong people must fightfor what is right without fear of the mighty.

Miss Ng's slogan - I want to have the right to electthe CE - is ringing and powerful. The government hasyet to come up with a roadmap for introducinguniversal suffrage, and it is uncertain whether HongKong people will enjoy genuine universal suffrage in2017. Yesterday, Ms Ng bluntly asked Henry Tangquestions to her students' thunderous applause. Thatmight have embarrassed the Chief Secretary.

However, if he sets aside his preconceptions, he willrealise the visit was worth his while because he didhear genuinely held views. If officials persist inengaging the community, they can, on the one hand,sell the government's package and, on the other, listento what people have to day. That is surely helpful indesigning a political system suitable to Hong Kong.

明報英語網「雙語社評」 english.mingpao.com/critic.htm

落區推銷政改做法正確老師有話直說良好示範

2010.05.20

明報社評

政府記取2005 年的教訓，今次政改諮詢改弦易轍，出動司局長落區爭取市民支持，頭炮是昨日政務司長唐英年到中學與師生對話。高官走出政府總部，接受民意洗禮，是開放及進步的表現，值得肯定；而提出尖銳問題的庇理羅士女子中學教師吳美蘭，面對高官而直言不諱，敢於說真話，是對學生的良好公民教育示範。

特區政府決意透過落區及舉辦論壇，游說市民支持方案，希望借民意游說溫和民主派轉軚接受方案。

反對政改方案的人也許會對政府的做法嗤之以鼻，認為只屬政治化妝，以文宣攻勢欺騙市民。

昨日，唐英年面對的情况雖然有一點尷尬，但卻彰顯這不是一場大龍鳳，不是政府與學校聯手做戲，所以特別珍貴，值得繼續做下去，但要檢討得失，例如， 「官員在補選中不投票」這問題社會早已提出，官員落區前必須心中有數，作好準備，隨時應付民眾的挑戰，真誠回應，若只是把官方回應如錄音機般重覆一次，又或被突如其來的質詢窒至啞口無言，就很難達致爭取支持的目標。

如何回應拒絕在立法會補選投票的質詢，全國人大常委范徐麗泰前日已作出示範，她指大部分市民都支持民主、希望早日落實普選， 「兩黨打着的目標應該有好多人認同，投票率不應該這樣低」，但結果顯示市民不認同與中央對立的手段，故選擇不投票或投白票。這說法可清楚顯示，即使是支持民主的人，不少也因為不認同「變相公投」這方式而選擇不投票，因此不投票也不代表「不盡公民責任」。

唐司長昨日的回應跟范太相比便有所不如，反觀提出質詢的吳美蘭老師則光芒四射。

吳老師敢於在權貴面前講真話，質疑官員對公民責任的承擔，又表明要求普選特首，為學生上了一堂活生生的公民教育課，身體力行地說明了港人應不畏強權，據理力爭。

吳老師「我要有權選特首」的口號，鏗鏘有力，政府的方案未能交出普選路線圖，2017 年是否有真普選仍然有變數。吳老師昨日直接提出質疑，加上學生們如雷的掌聲，也許會令司長尷尬，但官員若能放下成見，就會知道這回落區聽到的確是真心話，所以不枉此行。若能堅持做下去，一方面可以推銷政改方案，另方面可以直接聆聽民眾訴求、民間心聲，對制訂一個適合港情的政制必有所裨益。

G lossary

sit onbe a member of.

speak one's mind

say exactly what one thinks in a very direct way.bigwig / 'bIgwIg /important person.