THE Housing Society has proposed buildingmiddle middle--class PRH (public rental housing) toreduce the pressure arising from soaringproperty prices. Middle Middle--class PRH, for which the rent ishigher than ordinary PRH rent but lower than marketrent, caters to sandwich sandwich--class families. Doing so wouldin theory help some middle middle--class families that havedifficulty buying their own homes.
The middle middle--class PRH idea is theoreticallyfeasible. A middle middle--class family that lives in such a flatfor a certain term (five or ten years) will have a respite respite..When it has saved the money it needs to pay down ona private flat, it can vacate its flat for another family'sbenefit.
However, there are problems with middle middle--classPRH.
First, how many such flats must be producedbefore the demand can be met? Property prices havesoared in recent years mainly because flats have beenin short supply. The government has refrained fromputting land up for auction. Consequently, flat supplyhas persistently fallen short of demand. FinancialSecretary John Tsang said last February after he haddelivered his Budget speech that he expected 53,000private residential flats to be completed in the nextthree to four years, or only between 13,000 and 18,000a year. However, it is clear from records that HongKong people buy between 20,000 and 30,000 flats ayear. Supply will remain way below demand. Howmany middle middle--class PRH flats must be built beforedemand can be met? If only one or two thousand unitsare completed a year, the scheme will be like a cup ofwater to a blazing cartload of faggots. It would have noimpact whatsoever on the market.
Even those who have proposed building
middle middle--class PRH agree that the benefit enjoyed underthe scheme should be short short--term. They say it isnecessary to stipulate that a family may live in amiddle middle--class PRH flat only for a certain period.However, if property prices keep going up, when sucha family's term expires, a private flat may still bebeyond its means. Would the government then evictit? If it has no choice but to keep extending its term,the benefit the family enjoys under the scheme willbecome permanent.
One option is to take a measure like the better better--offPRH tenant policy - to force tenants to move out bycharging them double rent, market rent or even more.However, if tenants would rather pay market rent thanmove out or if most of them are adamant that theywould pay old rather than new rent, would thegovernment have their flats broken in and have theirfurniture and other belongings dumped onto garbagetrucks? Now thousands of better better--off tenants would notmove into private flats. Despite the better better--off tenantpolicy, the Housing Authority cannot kick them out ofPRH. On what could the Housing Society rely topersuade middle middle--class PRH tenants to vacate theirflats? This is politically impossible.
Furthermore, as middle middle--class PRH flats are not forsale, the government cannot possibly recover the landcost and the construction cost. If it builds moremiddle middle--class PRH instead of reviving the HomeOwnership Scheme (HOS), it will have to spend moreand more public money on subsidised housing. Itwould be doubtful that public housing developmentcould be sustained in the long term.
The problem with the property market lies in itssupply supply--demand imbalance. It cannot he solvedotherwise than by doing what may increase flat supply.The government should put land up for auction andsuitably revive the HOS. These ways have provedeffective. They would help bring about a permanentcure. Middle Middle--class PRH is only a short short--term substitute.The proposal is too hard to carry out to be worthadopting.
明報社評
2010.06.07
中產公屋易請難送未解樓市深層矛盾
為紓緩高樓價壓力，香港房屋協會建議興建為夾心階層而設、租金高於一般公屋但低於市值的「中產公屋」。這建議理論上可暫時紓緩部分中產家庭置業困難的苦况。
中產公屋在理論上是可行的，中產家庭以較市值便宜的價格入住一個有限的年期（例如55 年或10 年），中產家庭就可借此機會休養生息及儲蓄，待儲夠私樓首期後就可轉到私人市場，騰空單位讓另一個家庭受惠。
但是中產居屋有幾個問題。
首先，要興建多少中產公屋才可紓緩市場的需要？近年樓價急升，最主要原因是住宅單位供應因政府放棄主動賣地而大幅減少，造成持續的供不應求。財政司長曾俊華在本年22 月發表預算案後表示，預計未來33 至44 年約有53,000 個私人住宅新單位供應，即每年只有約1.3 萬至1.8 萬個單位，但證諸歷史，港人每年可消化介乎22 萬至33 萬個單位，供與求的差距依然巨大，到底要興建多少個中產公屋單位才能紓緩市民的置業需求？ 若擴建高級公屋計劃每年只能產生一兩千個單位，根本是杯水車薪，對市場起不了任何作用。
建議擴建中產公屋的人士都認為計劃只是短期資助，必須設入住年期，但若期限屆滿後樓價仍不斷上升，住戶無法負擔私樓價格，難道政府要強行把這些家庭趕出中產公屋？若不強行逼遷，入住年期被迫不斷延長，最終又會變成終身資助。
一個解決的方法是仿效公屋般設富戶政策，以雙倍、市值甚至比市值更高的租金把住戶逼走，但若住戶寧願付市值租金也不願搬走，或者集體只交舊租拒交新租，難道政府會破門入屋，把住戶的家俬雜物掉進垃圾車？房委會的富戶政策也無法把成千上萬不願搬往私樓的人踢出公共房屋，房協憑什麼可以做到？在政治上這根本不可行。
而且，出租公屋由於單位只租不售，即使高級公屋租金較一般公屋貴，政府也永遠無法收回建築及土地成本。若政府不復建居屋而擴大中產公屋計劃，公帑資助只會有增無減，長遠而言公共房屋能否持續發展，實在大有疑問。
住宅單位供不應求是樓市失衡的核心，不從增加土地及住宅供應入手，不可能解決問題，主動賣地和適量復建居屋都是增加供應的辦法，可行性久經驗證，屬於治本之道，高級公屋只是短期替代品，而且執行難度大，不值得推行。
GG lossary
respite /'respaIt/a break or escape from something difficult orunpleasant.
evict /I'vIIkt/
To evict a person is to force him to leave aflat or land.
break in
To break in a flat is to enter it by force.
2010年6月8日星期二
Sung rides on Goddess storm
Just two days prior to this year's June 4 anniversary, Chinese University of Hong Kong confronted students over their bid to display a replica of the Goddess of Democracy on campus.
As expected, tensions mounted. The outcome? The management backed down and the replica is now standing tall inside the campus. It was also suggested the confrontation helped to spur a record turnout at Friday's candlelight vigil.
I'm not sure if CUHK vice chancellor Lawrence Lau Juen-yee or others on the administrative and planning committee were fully aware of the sensitivity of the matter. If they wanted to ban the replica, had they considered beforehand how others - students and radical politicians - would react, and how they would handle the fallout?
Lau's team acted tough in the beginning, only to retreat in the face of the students' threat to defy the ban at all costs. This was the worst nightmare any management could imagine. If the committee hadn't anticipated the outcome, its members must be simple and naive.
The row at CUHK took a new twist yesterday, raising many eyebrows at the university. Lau's designated heir, Joseph Sung Jao-yiu, amazingly disclosed to a roomful of reporters that he had reservations about the move that angered students, saying he was in the United States when the committee arrived at its decision.
But Sung said he was informed of the development and had voiced concerns over the use of political neutrality as the grounds to reject the application. Sung went on to say he wasn't alone in holding this view, as other committee members also disagreed with the decision. He assured that after he takes over from Lau next month, he plans to resolve differences over the statue's future through dialogue with students.
What did all these remarks mean? The vice chancellor-designate effectively drew a rather distinct line to distance himself from the damning committee decision.
Cynics would be right in disputing the way Sung has absolved himself from a decision of a management that he was supposed to be part of.
Lau is unpopular among students who say he is too close to the government. When Sung was appointed as the successor, he was expected - aided by his liberal image - to improve the administration-student relationship.
It's understandable that Sung will have to clean up the fallout due to the ill-prepared handling of the Goddess event by his predecessor. But this doesn't justify him seeking to safely distance himself from the controversial decision. Bear in mind that Sung is no ordinary committee member, but also the vice-chancellor designate.
Had he felt uncomfortable with the Goddess issue, he should have sought to address it. Pleading that he was outside Hong Kong at the time is too lame an excuse. People should be able to have lofty expectations for him in such a controversy.
Sung may have won trust from students, but it's equally essential for him to gain the trust of his colleagues. It won't help the cause by projecting an impression that those backing the ban are bad guys, while he wears the white hat.
Nevertheless, the incident has provided him with the chance to demonstrate his public relations skills.
As expected, tensions mounted. The outcome? The management backed down and the replica is now standing tall inside the campus. It was also suggested the confrontation helped to spur a record turnout at Friday's candlelight vigil.
I'm not sure if CUHK vice chancellor Lawrence Lau Juen-yee or others on the administrative and planning committee were fully aware of the sensitivity of the matter. If they wanted to ban the replica, had they considered beforehand how others - students and radical politicians - would react, and how they would handle the fallout?
Lau's team acted tough in the beginning, only to retreat in the face of the students' threat to defy the ban at all costs. This was the worst nightmare any management could imagine. If the committee hadn't anticipated the outcome, its members must be simple and naive.
The row at CUHK took a new twist yesterday, raising many eyebrows at the university. Lau's designated heir, Joseph Sung Jao-yiu, amazingly disclosed to a roomful of reporters that he had reservations about the move that angered students, saying he was in the United States when the committee arrived at its decision.
But Sung said he was informed of the development and had voiced concerns over the use of political neutrality as the grounds to reject the application. Sung went on to say he wasn't alone in holding this view, as other committee members also disagreed with the decision. He assured that after he takes over from Lau next month, he plans to resolve differences over the statue's future through dialogue with students.
What did all these remarks mean? The vice chancellor-designate effectively drew a rather distinct line to distance himself from the damning committee decision.
Cynics would be right in disputing the way Sung has absolved himself from a decision of a management that he was supposed to be part of.
Lau is unpopular among students who say he is too close to the government. When Sung was appointed as the successor, he was expected - aided by his liberal image - to improve the administration-student relationship.
It's understandable that Sung will have to clean up the fallout due to the ill-prepared handling of the Goddess event by his predecessor. But this doesn't justify him seeking to safely distance himself from the controversial decision. Bear in mind that Sung is no ordinary committee member, but also the vice-chancellor designate.
Had he felt uncomfortable with the Goddess issue, he should have sought to address it. Pleading that he was outside Hong Kong at the time is too lame an excuse. People should be able to have lofty expectations for him in such a controversy.
Sung may have won trust from students, but it's equally essential for him to gain the trust of his colleagues. It won't help the cause by projecting an impression that those backing the ban are bad guys, while he wears the white hat.
Nevertheless, the incident has provided him with the chance to demonstrate his public relations skills.
2010年6月7日星期一
CUHK should have tolerance
TODAY is the 21st anniversary of the June 4incident. This year the authorities have"suddenly" invoked a statutory provision toconfiscate a new statue of the Goddess of Democracyand a carving. They have by doing so disruptedactivities to mark June 4 the Alliance in Support ofPatriotic Democratic Movements in China hasorganised. Yesterday, the administration of theChinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) rejectedstudents' application for the permanent placement ofthe statue on campus on the grounds of "politicalneutrality". The two events have not only encouragedcitizens to focus on June 4 but also warned them not toallow the passage of time to weaken their will todemand that Beijing reverse its verdict on the incident.
The Goddess of Democracy is an importantsymbol of June 4. The statue is of great politicalsignificance. Because of the nature Beijing says June4 is of, it is indeed a hot potato to the CUHKadministration. It has more than one option. One is toreject students' application high-handedly, but it is sureto draw fire. Another is to talk with students and facultymembers to find a satisfactory arrangement. Forexample, it may consider holding a "referendum" -leaving it to CUHK students to decide whether thestatue should stand on campus for ever. It is a sensiblesolution to employ a democratic process. Even if itdreads offending the central government, the CUHKadministration may plead its reluctance to go againststudents' will.
A university should be a place where all kinds ofthoughts are allowed to thrive. It should be like a sea,into which rivers empty. The administration of auniversity should cultivate an atmosphere in whichviews of all sorts interact with one another. It shouldallow students to live and pursue their studies in suchan environment.
The CUHK has been a seat of learning thatexhibits a strong humanist spirit. Its students are veryconcerned about society and have actively participatedin soical affairs. They have eagerly taken part in andeven led student movements. This tradition of theCUHK is to be cherished.
During June 4 all eyes were on Peking University(Beida) students. People watched how they led othersin pushing for democratisation and social progress. Itwas partly because of their initiative and fine qualitythat they concerned themselves with the nation's woesbefore others. However, the Beida spirit, which CaiYuanpei shaped, did make them believe none butthey should shoulder the burden. Cai Yuanpei's ideasof a university are Beida's valuable assets.
Chung Chi College's lily pond was completed inOctober, 1997. It was named Weiyuan Lake. Weiyuanis said to mean "less than perfect". Nevertheless, thename reminds people of Beida's Weiming Lake.
Weiyuan Lake is much smaller than Weiming Lake,and the former's scenery does not compare with thelatter's. However, one cannot rule out the possibilitythat Chung Chi people had Weiming Lake in mindwhen they decided what to call the lily pond. It doesnot matter how big the "lake" is. The fact that it iscalled "Weiyuan" shows the CUHK may aim atemulating Beida. If so, the CHUK administration oughtto tolerate all sorts of views in the hope that theuniversity will one day rival and even excel Beida.
2010.06.04明報社評
民主女神像雖具政治含義 中大兼容並包無損政治中立
今年是六四事件21 周年，近期先有港府「忽然」執法，沒收新民主女神像和雕塑，干擾支聯會的紀念六四活動，後有中文大學校方拒絕學生申請，不接納女神像在中大校園永久擺放，所持理由是「堅守政治中立」。
這兩件事不但促使市民聚焦六四，也警醒市民要求平反六四的鬥志不能隨時間而消逝。
民主女神像是六四事件的重要象徵，有重大政治意涵，以中央目前就六四事件的定性，對於中大校方確實是燙手山芋。不過，中大校方有不止一個做法處理。高壓否決是一個選擇，但必然招致強烈反彈；一個可能的做法是與學生和教職員磋商，尋找較佳的安排，包括考慮在校內舉行全民投票，由中大學生決定是否接納女神像在校內永久擺放。以民主程序解決，合情合理，校方縱有得失中央的憂慮，也有民意難違的依據。
大學應該是兼容並蓄、容川納海之所；校方應該刻意營造各種思潮，不同價值、意見和立場的氛圍，在校內激盪，讓學生在這種環境學習、成長。
過往，中大是人文精神較強烈的學府，對社會事務的關懷和參與程度也高，歷來許多學生運動，都少不了中大學生積極參與甚至主導的影子。中大這方面傳統，彌足珍貴。
六四事件期間，北京大學學生動見觀瞻，人們都在觀察北大學生如何身先士卒地推動民主和社會進步。北大學生敢為天下先，與他們的優秀品質和自覺有關，由蔡元培所塑造的校風，相信也是北大學生捨我其誰的動力。所以蔡元培建校理念，正是北大的寶貴資產。
1997 年10 月，崇基學院完成整治荷花池計劃，將之取名未圓湖，據解釋是「未及圓滿」之意。不過，這個名字，使人不期然聯想起北京大學校園的未名湖。當然，未名湖較未圓湖大得多，景致也非未圓湖可比，但是當年取名未圓湖，也不能排除參照未名湖之意。湖大湖小並不重要，若取名未圓湖，乃反映中大校方視北京大學為目標的心志，那麼，中大校方首要做到兼容並蓄、容川納海。期望有朝一日，中文大學成為與北京大學齊名、甚而超越北大的大學。
The Goddess of Democracy is an importantsymbol of June 4. The statue is of great politicalsignificance. Because of the nature Beijing says June4 is of, it is indeed a hot potato to the CUHKadministration. It has more than one option. One is toreject students' application high-handedly, but it is sureto draw fire. Another is to talk with students and facultymembers to find a satisfactory arrangement. Forexample, it may consider holding a "referendum" -leaving it to CUHK students to decide whether thestatue should stand on campus for ever. It is a sensiblesolution to employ a democratic process. Even if itdreads offending the central government, the CUHKadministration may plead its reluctance to go againststudents' will.
A university should be a place where all kinds ofthoughts are allowed to thrive. It should be like a sea,into which rivers empty. The administration of auniversity should cultivate an atmosphere in whichviews of all sorts interact with one another. It shouldallow students to live and pursue their studies in suchan environment.
The CUHK has been a seat of learning thatexhibits a strong humanist spirit. Its students are veryconcerned about society and have actively participatedin soical affairs. They have eagerly taken part in andeven led student movements. This tradition of theCUHK is to be cherished.
During June 4 all eyes were on Peking University(Beida) students. People watched how they led othersin pushing for democratisation and social progress. Itwas partly because of their initiative and fine qualitythat they concerned themselves with the nation's woesbefore others. However, the Beida spirit, which CaiYuanpei shaped, did make them believe none butthey should shoulder the burden. Cai Yuanpei's ideasof a university are Beida's valuable assets.
Chung Chi College's lily pond was completed inOctober, 1997. It was named Weiyuan Lake. Weiyuanis said to mean "less than perfect". Nevertheless, thename reminds people of Beida's Weiming Lake.
Weiyuan Lake is much smaller than Weiming Lake,and the former's scenery does not compare with thelatter's. However, one cannot rule out the possibilitythat Chung Chi people had Weiming Lake in mindwhen they decided what to call the lily pond. It doesnot matter how big the "lake" is. The fact that it iscalled "Weiyuan" shows the CUHK may aim atemulating Beida. If so, the CHUK administration oughtto tolerate all sorts of views in the hope that theuniversity will one day rival and even excel Beida.
2010.06.04明報社評
民主女神像雖具政治含義 中大兼容並包無損政治中立
今年是六四事件21 周年，近期先有港府「忽然」執法，沒收新民主女神像和雕塑，干擾支聯會的紀念六四活動，後有中文大學校方拒絕學生申請，不接納女神像在中大校園永久擺放，所持理由是「堅守政治中立」。
這兩件事不但促使市民聚焦六四，也警醒市民要求平反六四的鬥志不能隨時間而消逝。
民主女神像是六四事件的重要象徵，有重大政治意涵，以中央目前就六四事件的定性，對於中大校方確實是燙手山芋。不過，中大校方有不止一個做法處理。高壓否決是一個選擇，但必然招致強烈反彈；一個可能的做法是與學生和教職員磋商，尋找較佳的安排，包括考慮在校內舉行全民投票，由中大學生決定是否接納女神像在校內永久擺放。以民主程序解決，合情合理，校方縱有得失中央的憂慮，也有民意難違的依據。
大學應該是兼容並蓄、容川納海之所；校方應該刻意營造各種思潮，不同價值、意見和立場的氛圍，在校內激盪，讓學生在這種環境學習、成長。
過往，中大是人文精神較強烈的學府，對社會事務的關懷和參與程度也高，歷來許多學生運動，都少不了中大學生積極參與甚至主導的影子。中大這方面傳統，彌足珍貴。
六四事件期間，北京大學學生動見觀瞻，人們都在觀察北大學生如何身先士卒地推動民主和社會進步。北大學生敢為天下先，與他們的優秀品質和自覺有關，由蔡元培所塑造的校風，相信也是北大學生捨我其誰的動力。所以蔡元培建校理念，正是北大的寶貴資產。
1997 年10 月，崇基學院完成整治荷花池計劃，將之取名未圓湖，據解釋是「未及圓滿」之意。不過，這個名字，使人不期然聯想起北京大學校園的未名湖。當然，未名湖較未圓湖大得多，景致也非未圓湖可比，但是當年取名未圓湖，也不能排除參照未名湖之意。湖大湖小並不重要，若取名未圓湖，乃反映中大校方視北京大學為目標的心志，那麼，中大校方首要做到兼容並蓄、容川納海。期望有朝一日，中文大學成為與北京大學齊名、甚而超越北大的大學。
Tsang talks but Beijing has final say
Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam- kuen and his political lieutenants continued their roadshow, taking to the streets again to drum up greater support for the 2012 electoral proposal.
Tsang is trying his best to exorcise the curse that even though public opinion polls have consistently shown majority support for the proposed reform package, diehard opposition lawmakers are determined to ignore what most people want.
The chief executive hopes that by reaching out to the masses, the public can become a force strong enough to change the minds of at least a few to vote for the package at the critical moment.
It's clear Tsang is keen to engage the public to spread the message. He opted to do it quietly the first time, so that he could talk to the people freely wherever he went. This unpublicized approach angered political foes and the media. The open-top bus tours a week ago attracted scathing attacks as they were kept hush- hush until after the tours were finished.
Yesterday's outings were different - the government gave the timetable and roadmap of activities in order for the media to deploy reporters and photographers. The chief executive, chief secretary and financial secretary were to lead three different teams on Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories at 3pm. Itinerary details were announced to the press shortly before 1pm.
The advance notice was accommodating to the media, but it also allowed protesters to lay in waiting for the officials. Some suggested the League of Social Democrats somehow obtained the itinerary and posted it on the internet for its supporters to go after the officials, hence yesterday's commotion.
As seen by many people, Tsang's "Act Now" campaign may be a show. But it also confirms the helplessness of his administration over the situation, since in the end, it's the central government that has the final say.
Self-contradiction is evident in the SAR government's latest tactics. On one hand, Tsang and senior officials, including Executive Council members, have been seeking to lower community expectations for the 2012 package by sounding pessimistic about the outcome of the legislative vote.
On the other hand, the chief executive and government officials have embarked on an unprecedented political exercise to raise expectations to press for a two-thirds majority result for the vote.
But I'm concerned about the downsides associated with the two- pronged approach that is contradictory. The warning of low - or even no - confidence in the vote may be tactical in managing public expectations. There are shortfalls that, should the reforms be rejected, there will be substantial backlash from raised public expectations charged up by the campaign. Time is truly pressing. The vote will likely be held in a few weeks. Yet, everybody in town, including those in the SAR government, Democratic Party and Central Government's Liaison Office, is waiting for word from Beijing.
Meanwhile, it's still best to let society focus on striving to pass the proposals.
英文虎報 - Central Station | By Mary Ma
Tsang is trying his best to exorcise the curse that even though public opinion polls have consistently shown majority support for the proposed reform package, diehard opposition lawmakers are determined to ignore what most people want.
The chief executive hopes that by reaching out to the masses, the public can become a force strong enough to change the minds of at least a few to vote for the package at the critical moment.
It's clear Tsang is keen to engage the public to spread the message. He opted to do it quietly the first time, so that he could talk to the people freely wherever he went. This unpublicized approach angered political foes and the media. The open-top bus tours a week ago attracted scathing attacks as they were kept hush- hush until after the tours were finished.
Yesterday's outings were different - the government gave the timetable and roadmap of activities in order for the media to deploy reporters and photographers. The chief executive, chief secretary and financial secretary were to lead three different teams on Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories at 3pm. Itinerary details were announced to the press shortly before 1pm.
The advance notice was accommodating to the media, but it also allowed protesters to lay in waiting for the officials. Some suggested the League of Social Democrats somehow obtained the itinerary and posted it on the internet for its supporters to go after the officials, hence yesterday's commotion.
As seen by many people, Tsang's "Act Now" campaign may be a show. But it also confirms the helplessness of his administration over the situation, since in the end, it's the central government that has the final say.
Self-contradiction is evident in the SAR government's latest tactics. On one hand, Tsang and senior officials, including Executive Council members, have been seeking to lower community expectations for the 2012 package by sounding pessimistic about the outcome of the legislative vote.
On the other hand, the chief executive and government officials have embarked on an unprecedented political exercise to raise expectations to press for a two-thirds majority result for the vote.
But I'm concerned about the downsides associated with the two- pronged approach that is contradictory. The warning of low - or even no - confidence in the vote may be tactical in managing public expectations. There are shortfalls that, should the reforms be rejected, there will be substantial backlash from raised public expectations charged up by the campaign. Time is truly pressing. The vote will likely be held in a few weeks. Yet, everybody in town, including those in the SAR government, Democratic Party and Central Government's Liaison Office, is waiting for word from Beijing.
Meanwhile, it's still best to let society focus on striving to pass the proposals.
英文虎報 - Central Station | By Mary Ma
2010年6月5日星期六
Self-policing is ineffective
TRAVEL agents and tourist guides haveresumed compelling mainland visitors to makepurchases after a period of restraint. In thelatest case, a death occurred. Former national tabletennis player Chen Youming died of a heart attack.Some facts of the case (such as the illegal status ofthe tourist guide in question) show the situation isworse than it was.
Under a rule of the travel industry, no tourist guidemay take any visitors to a shop in which he has a stakeor with which he does business. The rule is aimed atpreventing conflicts of interest. However, we gatherthat a major shareholder in Win's Travel Agent ownsthe jeweller's where Chen Youming had a heart attack.The shareholder has opened three outlets. If visitorsknow that and they buy things in those places, they doso willingly. If they are in the dark and a guide takesthem to those outlets, one may suspect he hoodwinksthem. Clearly, a conflict of interest arises in such asituation, which is by no means fair to visitors.Therefore, the authorities should have the TravelIndustry Council (TIC) require its members to informtheir customers how they are connected with theoutlets they are taken to and allow them choice.
Apart from Chen Youming, the tourist guide inquestion is a principal of the "death from infuriation"case. It has been established that she is unlicensed.She held another's licence and passed herself off asthe other. How is she connected with Win's? How isshe connected with the woman to whom the licencebelongs? These are questions to which not only theindustry but also the police should find out the answers.
According to some in the industry, "illegal workers"have guided tours without a licence in the territory.They are paid less than licensed guides. Not bound byany licensing conditions, they may fleece visitors moreferociously to earn themselves and their employersmore commission. Furthermore, illegal tourist guidesare mostly mainlanders. They may just go home ifanything happens. It is not easy for the TIC to look intocomplaints against them. For example, the touristguide who allegedly enraged Chen, who subsequentlydied, is a mainlander. She is nowhere to be found. Shehas probably returned to the mainland.
The incident shows again the TIC is an ineffectivewatchdog. It shows self-policing is not sufficient toensure the healthy operation of the tourist industry,one of the major pillars of the economy. The TIC'swebsite says at the outset the body was set up in 1978to protect the interests of travel agents. What theunlicensed guide did in the case is not hard toascertain. It is not hard for Win's to make an account ofit. However, the TIC has asked Win's to submit a reportto it in two weeks. It appears to outsiders that it hasgiven Win's ample time so that it will have greaterleeway. There is suspicion that the TIC hopes thepassage of time will calm thing down. Furthermore,there is suspicion that it tries to protect its members asit refuses to reveal the subjects of the twenty-fourcomplaints against Win's it has received since 2006.
It gives no cause of much criticism for the TIC, anorganisation of the travel industry, to advance travelagents' interests. However, travel agents' interests donot coincide with visitors' interests or with Hong Kong'soverall interests. We therefore do not think it adequateto rely solely on the ineffective TIC to police travelagents. Furthermore, that ill becomes the industry'simportance to Hong Kong's economy.
In our view, the TIC must be drasticallyreorganised. At least the body (comprising totally ofpeople in the industry) should no longer be allowed todeal with visitors' complaints or discipline travel agents.The government should consider having anindependent body deal with such matters.
Unscrupulous travel agents and shops against whichmany complaints have been made should be named.The authorities should join forces with the media toexpose unscrupulous businesses. Only by taking thiscredible step can travel agents be deterred fromfleecing their customers.
明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm
明報社評
2010.06.03
劏客團死灰復燃旅遊業自律失效
旅行團、導遊強迫內地旅客購物的做法，沉寂一段日子之後，死灰復燃，今次更是搞出人命，導致前國家隊乒乓球選手陳佑銘心臟病突發死亡。今次事態一些情節，例如事涉「黑工導遊」等，顯示情况較以往更加嚴重。
現在業界規定，導遊不能帶旅客到自己開設或有生意關係的商舖購物，目的是防止出現利益衝突，不過，陳佑銘出事的珠寶店，據知是由永盛旅遊大股東所開設。據知這位大股東共開設了3 家商舖，團友若在知情下到其商舖購物，那是你情我願，若團友根本不知情，整個行程被安排到這3 家商舖購物，團友就有被蒙在鼓裏之嫌，選擇權被剝奪。這個情况，明顯存在利益衝突，對於團友而言絕不公平。所以，當局應該要求旅遊業議會對旗下旅行社明確規定，一定要披露旅行社與商舖的關係，讓團友知情和有選擇權。
今次「激死」事件的主角，除了陳佑銘，就是那位導遊。現已證實這位導遊原本無牌，她是持另一位導遊證件，冒充其身分帶團。這名冒牌導遊與永盛旅遊是什麼關係，與證件上的「真身」導遊又是什麼關係，不但業界關注，警方也應該查個究竟。
據業界人士透露，業內一直存在沒有持牌的「黑工導遊」，他們的薪金較持牌導遊低，又不受牌照規管，可以「更狠地」宰客，為本身和旅行社掙取更多佣金。還有一種情况，是這些「黑工導遊」，許多時都是內地人士，一旦出事，他們就可以返回內地，旅遊業議會要調查也有一定難度。正如這次被指「激死」陳佑銘的冒牌導遊，就是內地人，事發後已失蹤，猜測可能返回內地。
發生這件事後，再一次暴露旅遊業議會未能善盡監管功能，說明單靠自律，不可能讓本港重要經濟支柱之一的旅遊業健康地運作。其實，旅遊業議會在其網頁的自我介紹，開宗明義就說「香港旅遊業議會（議會）成立於1978 年，以保障旅行社的利益為宗旨」，這次「激死」事件，關於那位導遊的情况並不複雜，永盛旅遊應該不難交代，但是旅遊業議會卻給兩周時間交報告，外界看來，這是議會以更多時間給永盛旅遊迴旋，有讓時間冲淡事態之嫌。另外，議會對永盛旅遊2006 年迄今被投訴24 宗的內容，不予透露，也有保護其成員之嫌。
作為業內組織，議會為旅行社的利益服務，完全無可厚非，但是旅行社的利益，肯定與旅客的利益不一致，與香港整體利益也不盡相同。因此，單憑監管效益不彰的旅遊業議會，以自律為主的「管理」旅行社，我們認為絕不足夠，與其對香港經濟的重要性也不相稱。
我們認為，旅遊業議會必須大改組，起碼對旅客投訴，不能再由旅遊業界人士主導的旅遊業議會負責處理，政府應該委任業界外的獨立人士，處理投訴和懲處事宜，公布屢遭投訴的旅行社及商舖名字，匯聚媒體與制度的力量，使黑店現形，這樣的處理才有公信力，宰客歪風才可望遏止。
Glossary
hoodwink /'h ʊdwI ??k/deceive, delude.
choice
right to choose.
fleece /fli:s/
To fleece a person is to take a lot of moneyfrom him, especially by charging him too much.
Under a rule of the travel industry, no tourist guidemay take any visitors to a shop in which he has a stakeor with which he does business. The rule is aimed atpreventing conflicts of interest. However, we gatherthat a major shareholder in Win's Travel Agent ownsthe jeweller's where Chen Youming had a heart attack.The shareholder has opened three outlets. If visitorsknow that and they buy things in those places, they doso willingly. If they are in the dark and a guide takesthem to those outlets, one may suspect he hoodwinksthem. Clearly, a conflict of interest arises in such asituation, which is by no means fair to visitors.Therefore, the authorities should have the TravelIndustry Council (TIC) require its members to informtheir customers how they are connected with theoutlets they are taken to and allow them choice.
Apart from Chen Youming, the tourist guide inquestion is a principal of the "death from infuriation"case. It has been established that she is unlicensed.She held another's licence and passed herself off asthe other. How is she connected with Win's? How isshe connected with the woman to whom the licencebelongs? These are questions to which not only theindustry but also the police should find out the answers.
According to some in the industry, "illegal workers"have guided tours without a licence in the territory.They are paid less than licensed guides. Not bound byany licensing conditions, they may fleece visitors moreferociously to earn themselves and their employersmore commission. Furthermore, illegal tourist guidesare mostly mainlanders. They may just go home ifanything happens. It is not easy for the TIC to look intocomplaints against them. For example, the touristguide who allegedly enraged Chen, who subsequentlydied, is a mainlander. She is nowhere to be found. Shehas probably returned to the mainland.
The incident shows again the TIC is an ineffectivewatchdog. It shows self-policing is not sufficient toensure the healthy operation of the tourist industry,one of the major pillars of the economy. The TIC'swebsite says at the outset the body was set up in 1978to protect the interests of travel agents. What theunlicensed guide did in the case is not hard toascertain. It is not hard for Win's to make an account ofit. However, the TIC has asked Win's to submit a reportto it in two weeks. It appears to outsiders that it hasgiven Win's ample time so that it will have greaterleeway. There is suspicion that the TIC hopes thepassage of time will calm thing down. Furthermore,there is suspicion that it tries to protect its members asit refuses to reveal the subjects of the twenty-fourcomplaints against Win's it has received since 2006.
It gives no cause of much criticism for the TIC, anorganisation of the travel industry, to advance travelagents' interests. However, travel agents' interests donot coincide with visitors' interests or with Hong Kong'soverall interests. We therefore do not think it adequateto rely solely on the ineffective TIC to police travelagents. Furthermore, that ill becomes the industry'simportance to Hong Kong's economy.
In our view, the TIC must be drasticallyreorganised. At least the body (comprising totally ofpeople in the industry) should no longer be allowed todeal with visitors' complaints or discipline travel agents.The government should consider having anindependent body deal with such matters.
Unscrupulous travel agents and shops against whichmany complaints have been made should be named.The authorities should join forces with the media toexpose unscrupulous businesses. Only by taking thiscredible step can travel agents be deterred fromfleecing their customers.
明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm
明報社評
2010.06.03
劏客團死灰復燃旅遊業自律失效
旅行團、導遊強迫內地旅客購物的做法，沉寂一段日子之後，死灰復燃，今次更是搞出人命，導致前國家隊乒乓球選手陳佑銘心臟病突發死亡。今次事態一些情節，例如事涉「黑工導遊」等，顯示情况較以往更加嚴重。
現在業界規定，導遊不能帶旅客到自己開設或有生意關係的商舖購物，目的是防止出現利益衝突，不過，陳佑銘出事的珠寶店，據知是由永盛旅遊大股東所開設。據知這位大股東共開設了3 家商舖，團友若在知情下到其商舖購物，那是你情我願，若團友根本不知情，整個行程被安排到這3 家商舖購物，團友就有被蒙在鼓裏之嫌，選擇權被剝奪。這個情况，明顯存在利益衝突，對於團友而言絕不公平。所以，當局應該要求旅遊業議會對旗下旅行社明確規定，一定要披露旅行社與商舖的關係，讓團友知情和有選擇權。
今次「激死」事件的主角，除了陳佑銘，就是那位導遊。現已證實這位導遊原本無牌，她是持另一位導遊證件，冒充其身分帶團。這名冒牌導遊與永盛旅遊是什麼關係，與證件上的「真身」導遊又是什麼關係，不但業界關注，警方也應該查個究竟。
據業界人士透露，業內一直存在沒有持牌的「黑工導遊」，他們的薪金較持牌導遊低，又不受牌照規管，可以「更狠地」宰客，為本身和旅行社掙取更多佣金。還有一種情况，是這些「黑工導遊」，許多時都是內地人士，一旦出事，他們就可以返回內地，旅遊業議會要調查也有一定難度。正如這次被指「激死」陳佑銘的冒牌導遊，就是內地人，事發後已失蹤，猜測可能返回內地。
發生這件事後，再一次暴露旅遊業議會未能善盡監管功能，說明單靠自律，不可能讓本港重要經濟支柱之一的旅遊業健康地運作。其實，旅遊業議會在其網頁的自我介紹，開宗明義就說「香港旅遊業議會（議會）成立於1978 年，以保障旅行社的利益為宗旨」，這次「激死」事件，關於那位導遊的情况並不複雜，永盛旅遊應該不難交代，但是旅遊業議會卻給兩周時間交報告，外界看來，這是議會以更多時間給永盛旅遊迴旋，有讓時間冲淡事態之嫌。另外，議會對永盛旅遊2006 年迄今被投訴24 宗的內容，不予透露，也有保護其成員之嫌。
作為業內組織，議會為旅行社的利益服務，完全無可厚非，但是旅行社的利益，肯定與旅客的利益不一致，與香港整體利益也不盡相同。因此，單憑監管效益不彰的旅遊業議會，以自律為主的「管理」旅行社，我們認為絕不足夠，與其對香港經濟的重要性也不相稱。
我們認為，旅遊業議會必須大改組，起碼對旅客投訴，不能再由旅遊業界人士主導的旅遊業議會負責處理，政府應該委任業界外的獨立人士，處理投訴和懲處事宜，公布屢遭投訴的旅行社及商舖名字，匯聚媒體與制度的力量，使黑店現形，這樣的處理才有公信力，宰客歪風才可望遏止。
Glossary
hoodwink /'h ʊdwI ??k/deceive, delude.
choice
right to choose.
fleece /fli:s/
To fleece a person is to take a lot of moneyfrom him, especially by charging him too much.
Wake-up call for tourism chief
It's downright outrageous for a mainland tourist to suffer a heart attack and die following an argument with a "tour guide" during a forced shopping stop.
And the subsequent revelation that the "guide" was in fact bogus is equally disturbing. Is our tourism sector seriously ill?
The government has demanded the Travel Industry Council treat the case in the most serious manner, while the public also expects the TIC to show it's a credible industry regulator.
The possibility of the Hong Kong firm involved - Win's Travel Agency - being de-registered, or having its license revoked following the investigation, hasn't been ruled out.
According to the daughter of the deceased, Chen Youming, her father had paid 1,700 yuan (HK$1,940) to join the four-day tour. The group arrived in Hong Kong on May 21, and on the first day visited Ocean Park, The Peak, Golden Bauhinia Square, Repulse Bay and the Avenue of Stars.
The next day, the mainlanders were led to a jewelry shop. Chen, 65, a former national table tennis coach, collapsed after reportedly quarreling with the bogus guide, who allegedly refused to allow him to leave the store.
The Hunan resident died en route to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and Chen's family brought the matter to the TIC's attention on May 24.
Queries were raised about the council not publicizing the case until June 1, but it was likely respecting the family's wish to keep the case low- profile.
But there is certainly cause for concern in the way the authorities have been communicating with each other.
Tourism is a major economic pillar here, and both the TIC and Hong Kong Tourism Board are seen as important bodies safeguarding this pillar. It's only reasonable to expect them to communicate on major issues. Did they do so in this grave incident? Apparently, not.
Board chairman James Tien Pei- chun was the last key tourism official in Hong Kong to issue a statement after returning from Shanghai. He said he learned about the case when he was in Shanghai promoting the SAR to mainlanders. Tien said as soon as he became aware of the incident, he immediately contacted the TIC to find out more about it.
This isn't the first time there has been a breakdown in communication between government bodies. Last November, a row broke out between Tien and organizers of the East Asian Games over ticket allocation. At that time, Tien complained about a lack of tickets being reserved for HKTB to use in promoting the games overseas. But the event organizers retorted he was mistaken because the travel industry was asked back last June how many tickets it wanted to reserve for the December event.
I already warned at that time there had to be closer communication between the tourism board and government bodies at the working level.
Last year, the lack of communication cost Hong Kong a golden opportunity to promote itself to other countries with the help of the East Asian Games.
Perhaps, we haven't yet seen the cost of the latest communication breakdown. The situation is always dicey if our chief tourism ambassador is the last person to know about important matters.
And the subsequent revelation that the "guide" was in fact bogus is equally disturbing. Is our tourism sector seriously ill?
The government has demanded the Travel Industry Council treat the case in the most serious manner, while the public also expects the TIC to show it's a credible industry regulator.
The possibility of the Hong Kong firm involved - Win's Travel Agency - being de-registered, or having its license revoked following the investigation, hasn't been ruled out.
According to the daughter of the deceased, Chen Youming, her father had paid 1,700 yuan (HK$1,940) to join the four-day tour. The group arrived in Hong Kong on May 21, and on the first day visited Ocean Park, The Peak, Golden Bauhinia Square, Repulse Bay and the Avenue of Stars.
The next day, the mainlanders were led to a jewelry shop. Chen, 65, a former national table tennis coach, collapsed after reportedly quarreling with the bogus guide, who allegedly refused to allow him to leave the store.
The Hunan resident died en route to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and Chen's family brought the matter to the TIC's attention on May 24.
Queries were raised about the council not publicizing the case until June 1, but it was likely respecting the family's wish to keep the case low- profile.
But there is certainly cause for concern in the way the authorities have been communicating with each other.
Tourism is a major economic pillar here, and both the TIC and Hong Kong Tourism Board are seen as important bodies safeguarding this pillar. It's only reasonable to expect them to communicate on major issues. Did they do so in this grave incident? Apparently, not.
Board chairman James Tien Pei- chun was the last key tourism official in Hong Kong to issue a statement after returning from Shanghai. He said he learned about the case when he was in Shanghai promoting the SAR to mainlanders. Tien said as soon as he became aware of the incident, he immediately contacted the TIC to find out more about it.
This isn't the first time there has been a breakdown in communication between government bodies. Last November, a row broke out between Tien and organizers of the East Asian Games over ticket allocation. At that time, Tien complained about a lack of tickets being reserved for HKTB to use in promoting the games overseas. But the event organizers retorted he was mistaken because the travel industry was asked back last June how many tickets it wanted to reserve for the December event.
I already warned at that time there had to be closer communication between the tourism board and government bodies at the working level.
Last year, the lack of communication cost Hong Kong a golden opportunity to promote itself to other countries with the help of the East Asian Games.
Perhaps, we haven't yet seen the cost of the latest communication breakdown. The situation is always dicey if our chief tourism ambassador is the last person to know about important matters.
2010年6月3日星期四
Foxconn too big to fall
Apple chief executive Steve Jobs has broken his silence over Foxconn's suicide scandal. He says Foxconn is not a sweatshop and the suicide rate at the company's manufacturing base in Shenzhen is below the per capita rate in the United States.
Jobs defended Apple's major contractor at the top technology executives' annual gathering D8 conference in California, declaring his firm is on top of the situation at Foxconn.
"I can tell you a few things that we know: Foxconn is not a sweatshop. It's a factory, but they have restaurants and movie theaters," Jobs said. "They've had some suicides and attempted suicides. They have 400,000 people there. The rate is under what the US rate is, but it's still troubling."
Why did Jobs feel he had to defend Foxconn with remarks that may be considered controversial at present? Apple's iPads may provide the answer.
Since iPad first hit the market 60 days ago, the American technology giant has sold more than two million units. The frenzy is more intense than that of iPhone's launch in 2007. But, after 10 deaths at Foxconn's Shenzhen plant, labor right activists have called for a boycott of Apple products because Apple is Foxconn's biggest client.
It is clear in Jobs' statement that he has no intention of replacing Foxconn, especially now as it would undermine the launch of its best-selling iPad.
But how can Apple protect its most important revenue driver? Rumors are rife the California-based company will pay an extra amount to Foxconn workers by setting aside about 2 percent of the final retail price for a given product to subsidize Foxconn's pay raise.
If true, it would be a revolutionary initiative. By donating a tiny fraction of iPad revenues to workers' pay, Jobs will be putting a humanistic face on iPad, defending it against boycott calls. No wonder Foxconn is increasing workers' wages by 30 percent instead of the earlier projected raise of 20 percent.
Elsewhere in China, Honda is also moving fast to end the strike by more than 1,800 workers at its Foshan parts plant by offering a 24 percent pay hike.
Are there any lessons to be learned from the Foxconn suicide scandal and Honda's strike? The immediate reaction in the West is they serve as a wake-up call for multinational companies to reconsider their strategies in choosing China as the destination of choice to set up production lines because of the mainland's low labor costs.
This seems to be an alarmist warning. As said before, the double-digit pay rises won't immediately affect China's role as the world's major manufacturing base because, given the small base, salary payouts will still be relatively limited.
If the same happened elsewhere - say, British Airways - the airline would have to shut down immediately.
Hopefully, the intense public discussions about Foxconn will arouse the authorities' attention to genuine sweatshops across the mainland, where workers are not even paid the minimum wages, while having to toil long hours in dangerous and dirty environments.
This is the area deserving greater attention.*Overset by 610.*
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
Jobs defended Apple's major contractor at the top technology executives' annual gathering D8 conference in California, declaring his firm is on top of the situation at Foxconn.
"I can tell you a few things that we know: Foxconn is not a sweatshop. It's a factory, but they have restaurants and movie theaters," Jobs said. "They've had some suicides and attempted suicides. They have 400,000 people there. The rate is under what the US rate is, but it's still troubling."
Why did Jobs feel he had to defend Foxconn with remarks that may be considered controversial at present? Apple's iPads may provide the answer.
Since iPad first hit the market 60 days ago, the American technology giant has sold more than two million units. The frenzy is more intense than that of iPhone's launch in 2007. But, after 10 deaths at Foxconn's Shenzhen plant, labor right activists have called for a boycott of Apple products because Apple is Foxconn's biggest client.
It is clear in Jobs' statement that he has no intention of replacing Foxconn, especially now as it would undermine the launch of its best-selling iPad.
But how can Apple protect its most important revenue driver? Rumors are rife the California-based company will pay an extra amount to Foxconn workers by setting aside about 2 percent of the final retail price for a given product to subsidize Foxconn's pay raise.
If true, it would be a revolutionary initiative. By donating a tiny fraction of iPad revenues to workers' pay, Jobs will be putting a humanistic face on iPad, defending it against boycott calls. No wonder Foxconn is increasing workers' wages by 30 percent instead of the earlier projected raise of 20 percent.
Elsewhere in China, Honda is also moving fast to end the strike by more than 1,800 workers at its Foshan parts plant by offering a 24 percent pay hike.
Are there any lessons to be learned from the Foxconn suicide scandal and Honda's strike? The immediate reaction in the West is they serve as a wake-up call for multinational companies to reconsider their strategies in choosing China as the destination of choice to set up production lines because of the mainland's low labor costs.
This seems to be an alarmist warning. As said before, the double-digit pay rises won't immediately affect China's role as the world's major manufacturing base because, given the small base, salary payouts will still be relatively limited.
If the same happened elsewhere - say, British Airways - the airline would have to shut down immediately.
Hopefully, the intense public discussions about Foxconn will arouse the authorities' attention to genuine sweatshops across the mainland, where workers are not even paid the minimum wages, while having to toil long hours in dangerous and dirty environments.
This is the area deserving greater attention.*Overset by 610.*
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
Fly tonight!
It's every singer's dream to have his orher own concerts. Having one's ownconcerts means one is famous and one'swork has been recognised by the generalpublic.
I know there's still a long way to go forme, but I'm thankful for everyopportunity I'm given. It was an honourfor me to be able to sing at 529 Fly ToniteLive, which was held at the Venetian inMacau, with artistes from Taiwan, Chinaand South Korea. The concert wasorganised by my label to celebrate theestablishment of a new Asianentertainment brand "bma seed". Itwas particularly special to me as Iwas able to sing in my hometown,with friends and family in theaudience supporting me. Also I wouldreally love to thank my fanswho came all the way fromHong Kong to see me atthe concert.
However, I had a littleaccident at the pressconference the day before.Since my heels were sohigh I lost my balance andfell flat on my face. I wasmortified ( 窘)! But it wastouching that everybodycame to comfort me at thebackstage afterwards.And for this concert Iwould like to give my specialthanks to Patrick, who designedmy "Iron Man" dress (LED lightswere put underneath thedress). Also many thanks forMing and Pinko's help, as youtwo always make me look greatonstage.
Let's hope I will have my ownconcerts very soon. Wish meluck!
Writer's Profile
Chita Yu (余翠芝), in love with music since three. Make A LoveSong-her goal in music as well as the title of her firstEP-was released last year.
I know there's still a long way to go forme, but I'm thankful for everyopportunity I'm given. It was an honourfor me to be able to sing at 529 Fly ToniteLive, which was held at the Venetian inMacau, with artistes from Taiwan, Chinaand South Korea. The concert wasorganised by my label to celebrate theestablishment of a new Asianentertainment brand "bma seed". Itwas particularly special to me as Iwas able to sing in my hometown,with friends and family in theaudience supporting me. Also I wouldreally love to thank my fanswho came all the way fromHong Kong to see me atthe concert.
However, I had a littleaccident at the pressconference the day before.Since my heels were sohigh I lost my balance andfell flat on my face. I wasmortified ( 窘)! But it wastouching that everybodycame to comfort me at thebackstage afterwards.And for this concert Iwould like to give my specialthanks to Patrick, who designedmy "Iron Man" dress (LED lightswere put underneath thedress). Also many thanks forMing and Pinko's help, as youtwo always make me look greatonstage.
Let's hope I will have my ownconcerts very soon. Wish meluck!
Writer's Profile
Chita Yu (余翠芝), in love with music since three. Make A LoveSong-her goal in music as well as the title of her firstEP-was released last year.
Three--pronged approach
YESTERDAY the government released aconsultation framework on subsidising homeownership. As it had become known, thegovernment decided to keep the consultation exerciselow low--key. Though the government insists that it hastaken no position on the issue, it is clear from thedocument how it is inclined. Furthermore, nothing in itshows it is the government's policy objective to findways to straighten housing supply and demand out bymeans of the consultation exercise with a view tobringing about a healthy property market.
It is a major policy matter whether the governmentshould subsidise home ownership. The findings of theconsultation would affect many citizens. Thegovernment used to be rigorous in consulting thepublic about such an important matter (like health carefinancing). It used to call a press conference to givethe public information on it and meticulously follow therequired procedure. However, the consultationdocument was only posted on a special page on theTransport and Housing Bureau's website. No hardcopies of it have been prepared. As press storiesabout it can only be given limited space, those whohave no computers cannot read the full text of it. Asthey may not grasp the crux of the matter, it is indeeddoubtful that they can offer well well--considered, objectiveviews.
The consultation runs for about three and a halfmonths and closes on September 17. Secretary forTransport and Housing Eva Cheng has to submit herhomework to Chief Executive Donald Tsang so that hecan tackle the question of property prices goingbeyond middle class citizens' means in his policyaddress next October. The important consultationexercise will be kept low low--key. Unless it is broadlybased, it may be what the government uses topackage its own views as the public's.
Though Eva Cheng has stressed that thegovernment has taken no position on the issue, it isclear that the framework gives a negativerepresentation of many people's suggestion that thegovernment should revive the Home OwnershipScheme (HOS). For example, about land resourcesimplications, it says, "If land for PRH (public rentalhousing) development is to be used for subsidisedhousing, the long long--term land supply problem for PRHdevelopment would be exacerbated exacerbated." ."
If only the government makes long long--term planning,there will be sufficient land for PRH, private housingand HOS development. There is no problem of land forother sorts of housing being used for HOSdevelopment. Were there any problem, it would be ofthe government's own making and have nothing to dowith the HOS. The statement does smack of thegovernment's desire to sling mud on subsidisedhousing. The so so--called consultation is biased.
The framework says, "Some have pointed outthat, as shown from past trends in the property market,HOS flats cannot help curb the prevailing propertyprices." We have suggested that the governmentsuitably revive the HOS, but we have not done sobecause we want property prices curbed. In the pastthree decades, HOS flats were produced, but privateflat prices kept going up. The purpose of producingHOS flats is to offer flats sandwich class citizens canafford so that they can fulfil their dreams of owing theirown homes. That it would cause the property market tocollapse to revive the HOS is a groundless threat.
Never has the HOS caused the property market tocollapse. This is a fact. The property market crashedsoon after the handover. However, it did not becauseof the HOS but because of the impact of the Asianfinancial turmoil, the burst of the dotcom bubble andthe SARS outbreak.
In the final analysis, the problem with Hong Kong'sproperty market is that supply is out of equilibrium withdemand.
We urge that the government do three thingssimultaneously. It should, first, reorganise itself so thata single department will implement its housing policy;second, scientifically ascertain housing demand andaccordingly plan land supply; and third, resume regularland auctions and suitably revive the HOS. Only if itmakes strategic long long--term plans and does what mayhelp increase flat supply can it avert severe housingsupply supply--demand imbalance and prevent property pricesfrom roller roller--coastering.
交差式諮詢難有突破理順樓市須三管齊下
2010.06.02明報社評
政府就資助市民自置居所問題，昨日發表諮詢框架，正如事先已知的情况，這次諮詢以低調方式進行，雖云政府無立場，從內容所見，傾向卻甚為明顯，而且未看到政府要透過這次諮詢，尋求理順房屋供求，長遠地營造一個健康樓市政策的目標。
政府是否資助市民置業，其實是一項大政策，諮詢結果影響許多市民，類似這樣的大政策，例如醫療融資，政府都以較嚴謹做法處理——召開記者會公告周知、甚至發表諮詢文件等，相關程序做得一絲不苟。這次諮詢框架的資料，只上載在運輸及房屋局網頁內特別闢設的一個專頁。由於沒有文件，傳媒報道諮詢的內容有局限，若無電腦的市民，難窺全豹，在不了解問題的實質下，他們能否提供成熟客觀意見，實屬疑問。
這次諮詢到99 月17 日結束，諮詢期約33 個半月，運輸及房屋局長鄭汝樺要交功課，讓行政長官曾蔭權在10 月發表施政報告時，回應樓價高企下中產人士置業難的訴求。這樣一個重要諮詢以低調處理，若未經市民廣泛參與回響，可能結果是經過諮詢包裝的官意，由曾蔭權在施政報告宣示政策，能否對症下藥，實屬疑問。鄭汝樺雖然強調政府並無立場，但是對於不少人提出的復建居屋建議，諮詢框架明顯地以負面表述。例如，關於資助房屋對土地資源的影響，諮詢框架認為「把發展公屋用地用作興建資助房屋，長遠而言，公屋發展的土地供應問題將會惡化」。
在土地供應方面，只要有長遠規劃，公屋用地、私樓用地、居屋用地，三者並行不悖，根本就沒有資助房屋佔用了其他房屋土地的問題。若有問題，也由政府一手做成，並非居屋的問題。政府的表述有抹黑資助房屋之嫌，這是所謂諮詢的偏頗之處。
諮詢框架說「不少評論指出，從過往物業市場的軌迹可見，居屋不能遏抑當前的樓價」。我們建議復建適量居屋，並非為了遏抑樓價，事實上，證諸過去30 多年，在居屋與私樓市場同時存在之時，私樓樓價仍然持續攀升，居屋只是給予夾心階層可以負擔、以遂置業安居之夢的選擇。所以， 若說復建居屋會推冧樓市，乃屬毫無根據的恫嚇言詞，歷史上居屋從未推冧樓市，這是事實。就算回歸後樓市一度大崩圍，罪魁禍首也並非居屋，而是歷經亞洲金融風暴、科網股爆破、SARS 等連串衝擊的結果。
今天，本港樓市的問題，歸根究柢是供需失衡。
我們主張政府三管齊下：（ 11）調整架構，或重組職能）分工，由單一部門統籌房屋政策；（ 22）以科學方法，找）出市民對房屋的真實需求，然後規劃土地供應；（ 33）恢）復定期賣地和復建居屋。只有以戰略眼光長遠規劃，從供應面入手，才可以使房屋供應和需求不致過度失衡，樓市不致出現急升暴跌的局面。
G lossary
eexacerbate xacerbate /ek ek''ssaass ???be beIIt/ t/make worse.
making
If a problem is of your own making, it is createdby you rather than by anybody else.
It is a major policy matter whether the governmentshould subsidise home ownership. The findings of theconsultation would affect many citizens. Thegovernment used to be rigorous in consulting thepublic about such an important matter (like health carefinancing). It used to call a press conference to givethe public information on it and meticulously follow therequired procedure. However, the consultationdocument was only posted on a special page on theTransport and Housing Bureau's website. No hardcopies of it have been prepared. As press storiesabout it can only be given limited space, those whohave no computers cannot read the full text of it. Asthey may not grasp the crux of the matter, it is indeeddoubtful that they can offer well well--considered, objectiveviews.
The consultation runs for about three and a halfmonths and closes on September 17. Secretary forTransport and Housing Eva Cheng has to submit herhomework to Chief Executive Donald Tsang so that hecan tackle the question of property prices goingbeyond middle class citizens' means in his policyaddress next October. The important consultationexercise will be kept low low--key. Unless it is broadlybased, it may be what the government uses topackage its own views as the public's.
Though Eva Cheng has stressed that thegovernment has taken no position on the issue, it isclear that the framework gives a negativerepresentation of many people's suggestion that thegovernment should revive the Home OwnershipScheme (HOS). For example, about land resourcesimplications, it says, "If land for PRH (public rentalhousing) development is to be used for subsidisedhousing, the long long--term land supply problem for PRHdevelopment would be exacerbated exacerbated." ."
If only the government makes long long--term planning,there will be sufficient land for PRH, private housingand HOS development. There is no problem of land forother sorts of housing being used for HOSdevelopment. Were there any problem, it would be ofthe government's own making and have nothing to dowith the HOS. The statement does smack of thegovernment's desire to sling mud on subsidisedhousing. The so so--called consultation is biased.
The framework says, "Some have pointed outthat, as shown from past trends in the property market,HOS flats cannot help curb the prevailing propertyprices." We have suggested that the governmentsuitably revive the HOS, but we have not done sobecause we want property prices curbed. In the pastthree decades, HOS flats were produced, but privateflat prices kept going up. The purpose of producingHOS flats is to offer flats sandwich class citizens canafford so that they can fulfil their dreams of owing theirown homes. That it would cause the property market tocollapse to revive the HOS is a groundless threat.
Never has the HOS caused the property market tocollapse. This is a fact. The property market crashedsoon after the handover. However, it did not becauseof the HOS but because of the impact of the Asianfinancial turmoil, the burst of the dotcom bubble andthe SARS outbreak.
In the final analysis, the problem with Hong Kong'sproperty market is that supply is out of equilibrium withdemand.
We urge that the government do three thingssimultaneously. It should, first, reorganise itself so thata single department will implement its housing policy;second, scientifically ascertain housing demand andaccordingly plan land supply; and third, resume regularland auctions and suitably revive the HOS. Only if itmakes strategic long long--term plans and does what mayhelp increase flat supply can it avert severe housingsupply supply--demand imbalance and prevent property pricesfrom roller roller--coastering.
交差式諮詢難有突破理順樓市須三管齊下
2010.06.02明報社評
政府就資助市民自置居所問題，昨日發表諮詢框架，正如事先已知的情况，這次諮詢以低調方式進行，雖云政府無立場，從內容所見，傾向卻甚為明顯，而且未看到政府要透過這次諮詢，尋求理順房屋供求，長遠地營造一個健康樓市政策的目標。
政府是否資助市民置業，其實是一項大政策，諮詢結果影響許多市民，類似這樣的大政策，例如醫療融資，政府都以較嚴謹做法處理——召開記者會公告周知、甚至發表諮詢文件等，相關程序做得一絲不苟。這次諮詢框架的資料，只上載在運輸及房屋局網頁內特別闢設的一個專頁。由於沒有文件，傳媒報道諮詢的內容有局限，若無電腦的市民，難窺全豹，在不了解問題的實質下，他們能否提供成熟客觀意見，實屬疑問。
這次諮詢到99 月17 日結束，諮詢期約33 個半月，運輸及房屋局長鄭汝樺要交功課，讓行政長官曾蔭權在10 月發表施政報告時，回應樓價高企下中產人士置業難的訴求。這樣一個重要諮詢以低調處理，若未經市民廣泛參與回響，可能結果是經過諮詢包裝的官意，由曾蔭權在施政報告宣示政策，能否對症下藥，實屬疑問。鄭汝樺雖然強調政府並無立場，但是對於不少人提出的復建居屋建議，諮詢框架明顯地以負面表述。例如，關於資助房屋對土地資源的影響，諮詢框架認為「把發展公屋用地用作興建資助房屋，長遠而言，公屋發展的土地供應問題將會惡化」。
在土地供應方面，只要有長遠規劃，公屋用地、私樓用地、居屋用地，三者並行不悖，根本就沒有資助房屋佔用了其他房屋土地的問題。若有問題，也由政府一手做成，並非居屋的問題。政府的表述有抹黑資助房屋之嫌，這是所謂諮詢的偏頗之處。
諮詢框架說「不少評論指出，從過往物業市場的軌迹可見，居屋不能遏抑當前的樓價」。我們建議復建適量居屋，並非為了遏抑樓價，事實上，證諸過去30 多年，在居屋與私樓市場同時存在之時，私樓樓價仍然持續攀升，居屋只是給予夾心階層可以負擔、以遂置業安居之夢的選擇。所以， 若說復建居屋會推冧樓市，乃屬毫無根據的恫嚇言詞，歷史上居屋從未推冧樓市，這是事實。就算回歸後樓市一度大崩圍，罪魁禍首也並非居屋，而是歷經亞洲金融風暴、科網股爆破、SARS 等連串衝擊的結果。
今天，本港樓市的問題，歸根究柢是供需失衡。
我們主張政府三管齊下：（ 11）調整架構，或重組職能）分工，由單一部門統籌房屋政策；（ 22）以科學方法，找）出市民對房屋的真實需求，然後規劃土地供應；（ 33）恢）復定期賣地和復建居屋。只有以戰略眼光長遠規劃，從供應面入手，才可以使房屋供應和需求不致過度失衡，樓市不致出現急升暴跌的局面。
G lossary
eexacerbate xacerbate /ek ek''ssaass ???be beIIt/ t/make worse.
making
If a problem is of your own making, it is createdby you rather than by anybody else.
2010年6月2日星期三
think of 和 think about 之別
讀者Jeff 來電郵問，think of 和think about (somebody) 都用來表達想某人，兩者用法有何不同？
同是想人，可有不同的想法。可以睹物思人，偶然想起；也可以刻骨銘心，不能自已。
大部分時間， think of you 和think aboutyou 可以互通。若真的要細分，前者只是浮起一個泛泛的念頭，轉瞬即逝；後者則在腦袋中盤旋不止，甩也甩不掉。如果硬性以時間劃分，think of 只需兩三秒，think about 至少一分鐘或以上。
就以流行歌詞為例。黃霑所寫的︰「當你見到天上星星，可會想起我？」很明顯，歌者不奢望對方會對自己念念不忘，因此用英文可以粗略把它翻譯成：
When you see the bright stars above, do youthink of me?
相反，The Turtles 的Happy Together︰Imagine me and you, I do.
I think about you day and night.
It's only rightto think about the girl you love andhold her tight,So happy together.
既然是朝思暮想（day and night），thinkof you 就不足以表達思念之情，只可用thinkabout you 了。
同是想人，可有不同的想法。可以睹物思人，偶然想起；也可以刻骨銘心，不能自已。
大部分時間， think of you 和think aboutyou 可以互通。若真的要細分，前者只是浮起一個泛泛的念頭，轉瞬即逝；後者則在腦袋中盤旋不止，甩也甩不掉。如果硬性以時間劃分，think of 只需兩三秒，think about 至少一分鐘或以上。
就以流行歌詞為例。黃霑所寫的︰「當你見到天上星星，可會想起我？」很明顯，歌者不奢望對方會對自己念念不忘，因此用英文可以粗略把它翻譯成：
When you see the bright stars above, do youthink of me?
相反，The Turtles 的Happy Together︰Imagine me and you, I do.
I think about you day and night.
It's only rightto think about the girl you love andhold her tight,So happy together.
既然是朝思暮想（day and night），thinkof you 就不足以表達思念之情，只可用thinkabout you 了。
angelina JOLIE
Angelina Jolie, actress and humanitarian( 人道主義者), was born on June 4, 1975 inLos Angeles. She gave a star-makingperformance in the 1998 television film Gia(《霓裳情挑》), which was based on theshort, tragic life of model Gia Marie Carangi.
The role won her a Golden Globe Award forBest Performance by an Actress in aMini-Series or Motion Picture Made forTelevision.
Famous for her off-screen romances,Angelina Jolie has been married twice. Shemarried actor Jonny Lee Miller in 1995. Thecouple divorced in 1999. The next year Joliemarried Academy Award-winning actor BillyBob Thornton. That union lasted until 2003.
Jolie met Brad Pitt during the making ofMr and Mrs Smith (《史密夫決戰史密妻》)in 2004. The couple's first biologicaldaughter Shiloh was born in the Africancountry of Namibia (納米比亞) in 2006. Joliegave birth to twins Knox Léon and VivienneMarcheline on July 12, 2008 in southernFrance. The rights for the first images of thetwins were sold to People and Hello!
magazines for US$14 million. The photos arethe most expensive celebrity pictures evertaken.
The role won her a Golden Globe Award forBest Performance by an Actress in aMini-Series or Motion Picture Made forTelevision.
Famous for her off-screen romances,Angelina Jolie has been married twice. Shemarried actor Jonny Lee Miller in 1995. Thecouple divorced in 1999. The next year Joliemarried Academy Award-winning actor BillyBob Thornton. That union lasted until 2003.
Jolie met Brad Pitt during the making ofMr and Mrs Smith (《史密夫決戰史密妻》)in 2004. The couple's first biologicaldaughter Shiloh was born in the Africancountry of Namibia (納米比亞) in 2006. Joliegave birth to twins Knox Léon and VivienneMarcheline on July 12, 2008 in southernFrance. The rights for the first images of thetwins were sold to People and Hello!
magazines for US$14 million. The photos arethe most expensive celebrity pictures evertaken.
Inter-railing round Europe
Last summer, I went inter-railing allover Europe with three other friends.
Although reasonably popular for UKstudents, it is a rather unfamiliar idea inHong Kong. We bought an inter-rail ticket(which allowed us to get on any train atany time in any European country for aspecific time period), packed a hugerucksack (帆布背囊), and off we went! Wethought we'd travel to Eastern Europebecause it was more unconventionalwewanted to explore the "unknown".
Spanning 10 countries in 16 days, thatwas the bud of my travel bug, one smallreason that spurred (激發) my decision totake a gap year.
First stop: Bruges. "Where?" You mightask. Well, we only choseto go there because wewatched a film a week before calledIn Bruges, in which Colin Farrell starred.(Bruges is in Belgium just in case youdidn't know.)
However, before we even leftHeathrow, our trip was already eventful.We started at the very beginning of July,coinciding with the Wimbledon season.
Being a tennis fanatic (狂熱者) and havingjust been to Wimbledon a few daysbefore, running into Novak Djokovic atStarbucks and having a full-blownconversation with him was momentous.
So the trip went off to a thrilling start. AsI was still in awe by the fact that I talked toone of my favourite tennis players, andthat his autograph filled the first page ofmy Inter-rail diary, the cobbled (鋪有大卵石的) streets, historical medieval (中古的)buildings and canals of Bruges remindedme that my first real adventure hadcommenced, and it would be no less thanlife-altering.
.
Although reasonably popular for UKstudents, it is a rather unfamiliar idea inHong Kong. We bought an inter-rail ticket(which allowed us to get on any train atany time in any European country for aspecific time period), packed a hugerucksack (帆布背囊), and off we went! Wethought we'd travel to Eastern Europebecause it was more unconventionalwewanted to explore the "unknown".
Spanning 10 countries in 16 days, thatwas the bud of my travel bug, one smallreason that spurred (激發) my decision totake a gap year.
First stop: Bruges. "Where?" You mightask. Well, we only choseto go there because wewatched a film a week before calledIn Bruges, in which Colin Farrell starred.(Bruges is in Belgium just in case youdidn't know.)
However, before we even leftHeathrow, our trip was already eventful.We started at the very beginning of July,coinciding with the Wimbledon season.
Being a tennis fanatic (狂熱者) and havingjust been to Wimbledon a few daysbefore, running into Novak Djokovic atStarbucks and having a full-blownconversation with him was momentous.
So the trip went off to a thrilling start. AsI was still in awe by the fact that I talked toone of my favourite tennis players, andthat his autograph filled the first page ofmy Inter-rail diary, the cobbled (鋪有大卵石的) streets, historical medieval (中古的)buildings and canals of Bruges remindedme that my first real adventure hadcommenced, and it would be no less thanlife-altering.
.
暢所欲言A-Z
一起暢所欲言，閒話家常。融會文化及生活的語言，才是活的語言。逢周三刊出。
Hemingway 海明威
海明威（Ernest Hemingway） 是美國記者和作家，寫作風格以簡潔著稱，對美國文學及20 世紀文學的發展有舉足輕重的地位。海明威曾在古巴居住，其間完成了名著《老人與海》，憑此書獲得普立茲獎及諾貝爾文學獎。此外，《戰地春夢》及《太陽依舊升起》兩部作品被美國現代圖書館列入「20 世紀中的100 部最佳英文小說」。
相關字詞
The Old Man and the Sea《老人與海》
A Farewell to Arms《戰地春夢》
The Sun Also Rises《太陽依舊升起》
Hitler 希特勒
希特拉（Adolf Hitler）說過「人類的重要在於它的基本人種，地球上最高級的人種則是雅利安人」和「大自然把主宰的權力授予她的寵兒─最勇敢和最勤奮的強者，強者必統治弱者」。他覺得日耳曼人是最優秀的人種，並透過強調極端的民族主義，使德國人盲目支持他發動戰爭、屠殺他們眼中的「劣等」民族。
相關字詞
the Nazi Party 納粹黨
the Holocaust 大屠殺
concentration camp 集中營
gas chamber 毒氣室
Hawking 霍金
霍金（Stephen Hawking）1942 年生於英國牛津，父親是牛津大學畢業的熱帶病專家，母親於牛津研究哲學、政治和經濟。他童年時學業成績不突出，但喜歡設計極複雜的玩具。其後他入讀牛津大學攻讀自然科學，於1963 年被診斷患有肌肉萎縮性側索硬化症，即運動神經病。當時醫生診斷他只能活兩年，他雖然活下來，但在往後數十年全身逐漸癱瘓並失去說話能力。他於1988 年出版的科普著作《時間簡史：從大爆炸到黑洞》，從研究黑洞出發，探索宇宙起源和歸宿。他曾在英國、美國、日本及香港發表演說。
相關字詞
A Brief History of Time From the Big Bang toBlack Holes《時間簡史：從大爆炸到黑洞》
The Universe in a Nutshell《果殼中的宇宙》
the no-boundary proposal 「宇宙無邊界」
Hemingway 海明威
海明威（Ernest Hemingway） 是美國記者和作家，寫作風格以簡潔著稱，對美國文學及20 世紀文學的發展有舉足輕重的地位。海明威曾在古巴居住，其間完成了名著《老人與海》，憑此書獲得普立茲獎及諾貝爾文學獎。此外，《戰地春夢》及《太陽依舊升起》兩部作品被美國現代圖書館列入「20 世紀中的100 部最佳英文小說」。
相關字詞
The Old Man and the Sea《老人與海》
A Farewell to Arms《戰地春夢》
The Sun Also Rises《太陽依舊升起》
Hitler 希特勒
希特拉（Adolf Hitler）說過「人類的重要在於它的基本人種，地球上最高級的人種則是雅利安人」和「大自然把主宰的權力授予她的寵兒─最勇敢和最勤奮的強者，強者必統治弱者」。他覺得日耳曼人是最優秀的人種，並透過強調極端的民族主義，使德國人盲目支持他發動戰爭、屠殺他們眼中的「劣等」民族。
相關字詞
the Nazi Party 納粹黨
the Holocaust 大屠殺
concentration camp 集中營
gas chamber 毒氣室
Hawking 霍金
霍金（Stephen Hawking）1942 年生於英國牛津，父親是牛津大學畢業的熱帶病專家，母親於牛津研究哲學、政治和經濟。他童年時學業成績不突出，但喜歡設計極複雜的玩具。其後他入讀牛津大學攻讀自然科學，於1963 年被診斷患有肌肉萎縮性側索硬化症，即運動神經病。當時醫生診斷他只能活兩年，他雖然活下來，但在往後數十年全身逐漸癱瘓並失去說話能力。他於1988 年出版的科普著作《時間簡史：從大爆炸到黑洞》，從研究黑洞出發，探索宇宙起源和歸宿。他曾在英國、美國、日本及香港發表演說。
相關字詞
A Brief History of Time From the Big Bang toBlack Holes《時間簡史：從大爆炸到黑洞》
The Universe in a Nutshell《果殼中的宇宙》
the no-boundary proposal 「宇宙無邊界」
A blow to core values
FOOD and Environmental Hygiene Department(FEHD) officers and police officersconfiscated two statues of the Goddess ofDemocracy (of two generations) and a relief (titledTTiiaannaannmmaann MMaassssaaccrree) the Hong Kong Alliance in) Support of Democratic Movements in China haddisplayed in Time Square. They said they had done soaccording to the law. This is the first time the SARgovernment has suppressed activities to mark June 4on the pretext of law enforcement since the incidenthappened twenty twenty--one years ago. We would notconjecture as to the SAR government's motive or aim.
Nor would we conjecture whether it did so of its ownaccord or had been compelled to do so. We only wantto point out that it has dealt a blow to an importantelement of Hong Kong people's core values - theirfreedom of expression - as well as to "one country,two systems". It remains to be seen how the affair willunfold. Will the move deter citizens? We believe theywill give those who think themselves in the right astentorian answer at the next vigil to mark June 4(which falls on next Friday (June 4).
The FEHD and the police were apparentlyresponsible for the operation. They said the Alliancehad displayed the statues and the relief in TimeSquare without having first obtained a licence toorganise public entertainment under the Places ofPublic Entertainment Ordinance.
The key word of the ordinance is "entertainment".Activities organised by the Alliance are by no meansentertainment. They are solemn political activities. It isunjustifiable and absurd for the FEHD to have relied onthe ordinance to seize the statues and the relief. Whenit did so, it vilified the pro pro--democracy movement thathappened 21 years ago and slandered those heroicpeople who died in the armed repression.
As matters stand, the government had carefullyplanned the confiscation of the statues and the relief.That day deputy district commander (Wan Chai)Au Au--yeung Chiu Chiu--kong was there to direct the operation.The confiscation was by no means fortuitous. It is clearthat the operation had been meticulously prepared.
The first first--generation version of the Goddess ofDemocracy was displayed in front of the CulturalCentre in Tsim Sha Tsui many times. After somespace in Time Square had again been made open tothe public, the statute was displayed there at leasttwice. The government had not regarded its exhibitionas illegal. This year it has kicked up a fuss. Theordinance it has relied on does not apply to thesituation. The explanations it has offered are toofar far--fetched to sound acceptable. It is baffling that theSAR government has disrupted the Alliance's activitiesto mark June 4 on the pretext of enforcing the law. Theonly explanation is that it has done so for politicalreasons.
Over the past twenty years, the Alliance hasorganised annual commemorations of June 4. HongKong people have been keen on taking part in them.
Hong Kong people's inflexible stance on June 4 is anindicator of their freedom of expression - a vital part oftheir core values. What the SAR government has doneis essentially to deal a blow to Hong Kong people'score values.
In the wake of June 4, many governments andpoliticians in the West used the incident to gain politicaladvantages. Few of them would mention June 4 anymore. Hong Kong is the only Chinese place wherepeople commemorate June 4 anniversaries. Thatshows Hong Kong people are not opportunist opportunist. It is. worth finding out what the SAR government intends toachieve by suddenly disrupting the Alliance's activities.
The incident reminds us that, last year, the SARgovernment unjustifiably prevented BBaaooddiiaaoo SSeeccoonnddfrom travelling to the Diaoyu Island to assert China'ssovereignty over it. That was the first time the SARgovernment had restricted Hong Kong people'sfreedom of movement and infringed on theirfundamental rights on the pretext of law enforcement.For the first time since June 4 happened twenty twenty--oneyears ago, it has disrupted the Alliance's activities tomark the incident. That is certainly its second attemptto curtail Hong Kong people's freedoms. If the SARgovernment refrains even from protecting Hong Kongpeople's fundamental rights and willingly serves as acat's cat's--paw to help erode their fundamental freedoms, itwill certainly be spurned by many of them.
明報社評2010.06.01
港府干擾紀念六四活動 港人核心價值再遭衝擊
支聯會在銅鑼灣時代廣場擺放的兩個世代「民主女神像」和「天安門屠殺浮雕」，被食環署會同警方人員以「依法辦事」為名，強行沒收。這是六四事件21 年以來，港府首次以法治之名，打壓六四紀念活動。我們不猜測港府的動機與目的，也不猜度港府是主動出擊或被迫出手，我們要指出的是，此事是對港人其中一項核心價值——言論自由的衝擊，也是對一國兩制的衝擊。事態如何發展尚待觀察，不過，今次舉措會否嚇倒港人？本周五（ 66 月44 日）晚上紀念六四的燭光晚會，相信港人會給自以為是的人一個響亮的回應。
表面上，涉及這次事件的是食環署和警務處。他們的法律依據是，支聯會在時代廣場展示新民主女神像及天安門屠殺浮雕，卻未有按照《公衆娛樂場所條例》的規定，向食環署領取臨時公衆娛樂場所牌照。
條例最關鍵之處是娛樂，支聯會紀念六四活動，絕非娛樂，而是嚴肅的政治行為。因此，食環署以這條條例沒收女神像和雕塑，不但牽強和荒謬，對於21 年前死於武力鎮壓的民主英烈和整場民主運動，也是極大的貶損和污衊。
從情况看來，港府早已策劃並安排沒收女神像和雕塑，當日灣仔警區副指揮官歐陽照剛更親自在場指揮，整個沒收行動，絕非偶發事件，顯然經過周密策劃和部署。
支聯會的第一代民主女神像，以往在尖沙嘴文化中心廣場擺放多次，在時代廣場回復公共空間之後，民主女神像也在這裏展示至少兩次。以往港府都未視為違法，今年煞有介事地行動，所援引法例卻是那麼不對題、解說理據是那麼牽強，無法使人信服。所以，除了基於政治考慮，實質進行政治打壓以外，無法理解港府為何假借依法辦事之名，行干擾支聯會紀念六四活動之實。過去20 年，支聯會每年都舉辦紀念六四活動，港人積極參與，港人對六四事件的執著，正是香港核心價值之一——言論自由的重要指標。港府今次的舉措，實質上衝擊着這個核心價值。
1989 年六四事件發生時，西方國家和許多外國政客把事件作為政治本錢，撈取政治利益，如今，這些國家、政客都已經不再提及此事了。但是，港人在中國唯一的地方 ——香港，年年紀念六四，說明港人並不投機。今年港府「突然」干擾支聯會的紀念活動，背後蘊含什麼盤算，值得密切關注。
這件事，使我們想起去年港府以「莫須有」罪名，阻撓「保釣二號」出海，前往釣魚島宣示主權，此事乃回歸以來，港府首次以依法辦事為名，限制港人的行動自由，侵蝕港人的基本權利。六四事件21 年之後，港府首次干擾支聯會的紀念六四活動，肯定是衝擊港人自由的另一次嘗試。若港府連港人的基本權利也不捍衛，甘願成為侵蝕港人基本自由的打手，則這樣的特區政府，勢必為許多港人所唾棄。
Glossary
of one's own accord
If you do something of your own accord, youdo it without being asked.
stentorian /sten sten''tt ɔɔ:r :rII ??n/ n/loud and powerful.
Nor would we conjecture whether it did so of its ownaccord or had been compelled to do so. We only wantto point out that it has dealt a blow to an importantelement of Hong Kong people's core values - theirfreedom of expression - as well as to "one country,two systems". It remains to be seen how the affair willunfold. Will the move deter citizens? We believe theywill give those who think themselves in the right astentorian answer at the next vigil to mark June 4(which falls on next Friday (June 4).
The FEHD and the police were apparentlyresponsible for the operation. They said the Alliancehad displayed the statues and the relief in TimeSquare without having first obtained a licence toorganise public entertainment under the Places ofPublic Entertainment Ordinance.
The key word of the ordinance is "entertainment".Activities organised by the Alliance are by no meansentertainment. They are solemn political activities. It isunjustifiable and absurd for the FEHD to have relied onthe ordinance to seize the statues and the relief. Whenit did so, it vilified the pro pro--democracy movement thathappened 21 years ago and slandered those heroicpeople who died in the armed repression.
As matters stand, the government had carefullyplanned the confiscation of the statues and the relief.That day deputy district commander (Wan Chai)Au Au--yeung Chiu Chiu--kong was there to direct the operation.The confiscation was by no means fortuitous. It is clearthat the operation had been meticulously prepared.
The first first--generation version of the Goddess ofDemocracy was displayed in front of the CulturalCentre in Tsim Sha Tsui many times. After somespace in Time Square had again been made open tothe public, the statute was displayed there at leasttwice. The government had not regarded its exhibitionas illegal. This year it has kicked up a fuss. Theordinance it has relied on does not apply to thesituation. The explanations it has offered are toofar far--fetched to sound acceptable. It is baffling that theSAR government has disrupted the Alliance's activitiesto mark June 4 on the pretext of enforcing the law. Theonly explanation is that it has done so for politicalreasons.
Over the past twenty years, the Alliance hasorganised annual commemorations of June 4. HongKong people have been keen on taking part in them.
Hong Kong people's inflexible stance on June 4 is anindicator of their freedom of expression - a vital part oftheir core values. What the SAR government has doneis essentially to deal a blow to Hong Kong people'score values.
In the wake of June 4, many governments andpoliticians in the West used the incident to gain politicaladvantages. Few of them would mention June 4 anymore. Hong Kong is the only Chinese place wherepeople commemorate June 4 anniversaries. Thatshows Hong Kong people are not opportunist opportunist. It is. worth finding out what the SAR government intends toachieve by suddenly disrupting the Alliance's activities.
The incident reminds us that, last year, the SARgovernment unjustifiably prevented BBaaooddiiaaoo SSeeccoonnddfrom travelling to the Diaoyu Island to assert China'ssovereignty over it. That was the first time the SARgovernment had restricted Hong Kong people'sfreedom of movement and infringed on theirfundamental rights on the pretext of law enforcement.For the first time since June 4 happened twenty twenty--oneyears ago, it has disrupted the Alliance's activities tomark the incident. That is certainly its second attemptto curtail Hong Kong people's freedoms. If the SARgovernment refrains even from protecting Hong Kongpeople's fundamental rights and willingly serves as acat's cat's--paw to help erode their fundamental freedoms, itwill certainly be spurned by many of them.
明報社評2010.06.01
港府干擾紀念六四活動 港人核心價值再遭衝擊
支聯會在銅鑼灣時代廣場擺放的兩個世代「民主女神像」和「天安門屠殺浮雕」，被食環署會同警方人員以「依法辦事」為名，強行沒收。這是六四事件21 年以來，港府首次以法治之名，打壓六四紀念活動。我們不猜測港府的動機與目的，也不猜度港府是主動出擊或被迫出手，我們要指出的是，此事是對港人其中一項核心價值——言論自由的衝擊，也是對一國兩制的衝擊。事態如何發展尚待觀察，不過，今次舉措會否嚇倒港人？本周五（ 66 月44 日）晚上紀念六四的燭光晚會，相信港人會給自以為是的人一個響亮的回應。
表面上，涉及這次事件的是食環署和警務處。他們的法律依據是，支聯會在時代廣場展示新民主女神像及天安門屠殺浮雕，卻未有按照《公衆娛樂場所條例》的規定，向食環署領取臨時公衆娛樂場所牌照。
條例最關鍵之處是娛樂，支聯會紀念六四活動，絕非娛樂，而是嚴肅的政治行為。因此，食環署以這條條例沒收女神像和雕塑，不但牽強和荒謬，對於21 年前死於武力鎮壓的民主英烈和整場民主運動，也是極大的貶損和污衊。
從情况看來，港府早已策劃並安排沒收女神像和雕塑，當日灣仔警區副指揮官歐陽照剛更親自在場指揮，整個沒收行動，絕非偶發事件，顯然經過周密策劃和部署。
支聯會的第一代民主女神像，以往在尖沙嘴文化中心廣場擺放多次，在時代廣場回復公共空間之後，民主女神像也在這裏展示至少兩次。以往港府都未視為違法，今年煞有介事地行動，所援引法例卻是那麼不對題、解說理據是那麼牽強，無法使人信服。所以，除了基於政治考慮，實質進行政治打壓以外，無法理解港府為何假借依法辦事之名，行干擾支聯會紀念六四活動之實。過去20 年，支聯會每年都舉辦紀念六四活動，港人積極參與，港人對六四事件的執著，正是香港核心價值之一——言論自由的重要指標。港府今次的舉措，實質上衝擊着這個核心價值。
1989 年六四事件發生時，西方國家和許多外國政客把事件作為政治本錢，撈取政治利益，如今，這些國家、政客都已經不再提及此事了。但是，港人在中國唯一的地方 ——香港，年年紀念六四，說明港人並不投機。今年港府「突然」干擾支聯會的紀念活動，背後蘊含什麼盤算，值得密切關注。
這件事，使我們想起去年港府以「莫須有」罪名，阻撓「保釣二號」出海，前往釣魚島宣示主權，此事乃回歸以來，港府首次以依法辦事為名，限制港人的行動自由，侵蝕港人的基本權利。六四事件21 年之後，港府首次干擾支聯會的紀念六四活動，肯定是衝擊港人自由的另一次嘗試。若港府連港人的基本權利也不捍衛，甘願成為侵蝕港人基本自由的打手，則這樣的特區政府，勢必為許多港人所唾棄。
Glossary
of one's own accord
If you do something of your own accord, youdo it without being asked.
stentorian /sten sten''tt ɔɔ:r :rII ??n/ n/loud and powerful.
War of words muddles reality
Ever since Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen initiated his "Act Now" offensive, there has been no lack of sarcasm attacking it.
And as the days go by, the gimmicks are getting only more creative. Even Tsang had to admit this on his Facebook page, referring to the creative alteration of the Chinese words for "Act Now" into "All Wrong" - while keeping the characters 90 percent intact.
Certainly in Tsang's view, what's "all wrong" was the opposition lawmakers ganging up to veto the proposed democratic reforms in 2005.
Minds have changed over time. Politicians have been making the rounds drumming up public support for the 2012 package, and the sessions are starting to liven up.
At a Kwun Tong secondary school yesterday, a teacher became a warrior and students turned into soldiers before the TV cameras, as they confronted Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun- wah during an exchange on democratic development.
The male teacher waved an A3-size paper bearing the "All Wrong" slogan. This was reminiscent of an episode at another school where a female teacher challenged Chief Secretary Henry Tang Ying-yen in a similar tone.
There were also confrontations over the police seizure of the replica Goddess of Democracy statues at a pre-June 4 rally. Fortunately, police acted quickly to defuse the potentially explosive situation by returning them yesterday.
The teachers and protesters aren't idiotic. On the contrary, they're smart. But are they right or wrong? It depends on who you ask.
Yet, what is clear is that, however creative the episodes may be, the core question remains the same one that has been repeatedly asked these days - what do we want in 2012?
Do we want nothing to change for the good, or do we want to progress so that the SAR will get closer to its goal of achieving universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020?
The recent creative remarks won't change the bitter consequence that Hong Kong will face in the event the 2012 package is voted down. There will still be the dim likelihood society will be polarized further, with some behaving even more radically. In the end, the general public will be the losers.
It has been suggested the 2012 chief executive and Legislative Council elections should be split up for separate voting, to ensure the passage of at least the less controversial half of the package. This should be the last resort. It's still best to keep them intact during the vote unless it absolutely can't be achieved.
There is also the proposal by the Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood to postpone the vote from mid-July to October. But this would only delay the inevitable necessity of choosing between progress and the status quo.
There is no harm in staging the sideshows as long as key players remain focused on the core matter. The rigorous scenes at schools are nothing to fear.
Perhaps the school forums are no longer those that older generations used to understand. But do the non- conventional exchanges give everybody an opportunity to express their views?
In the end, the core issue remains the same.
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
And as the days go by, the gimmicks are getting only more creative. Even Tsang had to admit this on his Facebook page, referring to the creative alteration of the Chinese words for "Act Now" into "All Wrong" - while keeping the characters 90 percent intact.
Certainly in Tsang's view, what's "all wrong" was the opposition lawmakers ganging up to veto the proposed democratic reforms in 2005.
Minds have changed over time. Politicians have been making the rounds drumming up public support for the 2012 package, and the sessions are starting to liven up.
At a Kwun Tong secondary school yesterday, a teacher became a warrior and students turned into soldiers before the TV cameras, as they confronted Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun- wah during an exchange on democratic development.
The male teacher waved an A3-size paper bearing the "All Wrong" slogan. This was reminiscent of an episode at another school where a female teacher challenged Chief Secretary Henry Tang Ying-yen in a similar tone.
There were also confrontations over the police seizure of the replica Goddess of Democracy statues at a pre-June 4 rally. Fortunately, police acted quickly to defuse the potentially explosive situation by returning them yesterday.
The teachers and protesters aren't idiotic. On the contrary, they're smart. But are they right or wrong? It depends on who you ask.
Yet, what is clear is that, however creative the episodes may be, the core question remains the same one that has been repeatedly asked these days - what do we want in 2012?
Do we want nothing to change for the good, or do we want to progress so that the SAR will get closer to its goal of achieving universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020?
The recent creative remarks won't change the bitter consequence that Hong Kong will face in the event the 2012 package is voted down. There will still be the dim likelihood society will be polarized further, with some behaving even more radically. In the end, the general public will be the losers.
It has been suggested the 2012 chief executive and Legislative Council elections should be split up for separate voting, to ensure the passage of at least the less controversial half of the package. This should be the last resort. It's still best to keep them intact during the vote unless it absolutely can't be achieved.
There is also the proposal by the Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood to postpone the vote from mid-July to October. But this would only delay the inevitable necessity of choosing between progress and the status quo.
There is no harm in staging the sideshows as long as key players remain focused on the core matter. The rigorous scenes at schools are nothing to fear.
Perhaps the school forums are no longer those that older generations used to understand. But do the non- conventional exchanges give everybody an opportunity to express their views?
In the end, the core issue remains the same.
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
2010年6月1日星期二
Copycat
IT is said that The Mysteries of Love, a TVBseries, is a pirate version of Galileo, a JapaneseTV series. That has aroused Japanese media'sattention and Japanese netizens' criticism. It is hard toprove in law a work is a copy of another. However, thehero and heroine of the TVB series are respectively aphysicist and a policewoman like those in Galileo. Theway they talk and the scenes in which they appear areredolent of Galileo, so much so that TVB cannotescape being called a copycat. Hong Kong TV seriesonce thrilled Chinese people in all parts of the world,and Hong Kong has been bent on developing itscreative industry. However, if Hong Kong producersonly learn from foreign series instead of setting greatstore by originality, it will be doubly hard to developHong Kong's creative industry.
Galileo has its peculiarities. For example, physicistYukawa Manabu (its hero, played by FukuyamaMasaharu) typically covers his nose with his handwhen he ponders on a case. In his laboratory there is ablackboard cluttered with incomprehensiblemathematical expressions. When they viewed the firstepisode of The Mysteries of Love, people immediatelynoticed its many similarities with the Japanese series.
Lau Ka-ho, producer of the The Mysteries of Love,said, "We are creative workers; we never copy!" Thatmay be the case in law. Furthermore, if the heroes andheroines of the two series deal with entirely differentcases though they have similar capacities and appearin similar sets, TVB's series can hardly be called acopy in law. Nevertheless, though what TVB has doneis legally defensible, it does not follow that the series isrespected.
It is absolutely wrong to say Hong Kong peopleare not creative. A few years ago, Infernal Affairs woncritical acclaim and was a huge box-office success. Itsplot of the police and a gang infiltrating into each otherwas extremely well received. Its script caught thefancy of a Hollywood filmmaker, who acquired therights to it and remade it as The Departed, which wona few Oscars. Who says Hong Kong lacks creativepeople?
It is not shameful for creative workers to open theireyes to the whole world and learn from others' works.However, it is of overriding importance to respectcopyrights. The Hollywood filmmaker acquired therights to the script of Infernal Affairs, a Hong Kong film.If Hong Kong TV stations want to learn from foreignseries, they ought to respect their creators' pains. Ifthey do so, they can conceivably command respect.
One would think that, when a TV station is called acopycat, viewers may exercise the right they have asconsumers and vote with their remotes. However,Hong Kong TV broadcasters occupy valuable free TVchannels. Only two free TV programme servicelicences has been issued. Even if businesses apply forsuch licences, their applications will not be granted inthe foreseeable future. Hong Kong TV series lackoriginality and may be full of plagiarisms mainlybecause there is little competition between the free TVprogramme service licensees. To encourage them todo creative work and to develop Hong Kong's creativeindustry, it is necessary for the government to changeits policy on TV broadcasting. Only if it opens up thefree TV channels and brings in competitors to breakthe monopoly up will people break themselves of theirviewing habits. Only then will creative Hong Kong TVseries come to the fore.
明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm
重模仿輕原創創意產業事倍功半
明報社評
2010.05.31
無綫電視劇《談情說案》被指為山寨版日劇《神探伽利略》，引來日本傳媒關注及日本網民批評。要在法律上指證某一作品屬抄襲，十分困難，然而，《談》劇不論男女主角的物理學家及警察身分、場景設計、男主角說話神態等，都似曾相識，貌似《神》劇，難逃被指模仿之嫌。港產電視劇曾經風靡全球華人，近年香港也銳意發展創意產業，但若港產電視劇只懂「參考」外劇，輕視原創，創意工業勢將事倍功半。
日劇《神探伽利略》有一些招牌特色，例如男主角福山雅治飾演的物理學家湯川學，思考案情時以手指掩鼻遮面的招牌動作；又如實驗室黑板上寫滿深奧難明的數學算式。當無綫電視劇《談情說案》播出時，觀眾立即發現兩劇有不少類同之處。
無綫《談》劇的監製劉家豪強調並無抄襲，又說「我們是創作人，肯定不會抄襲！」法律上來說，這也許是對的，若兩劇只是部分主角身分與場景類似，但具體案件內容全部不同，抄襲在法律上的確難以成立。可是，即使法律上過得了關，不代表劇集會獲得尊重。
香港人絕非沒有創意，例如，幾年前電影《無間道》叫好又叫座，警察與黑幫互派臥底的橋段大獲好評，劇本更獲外國片商垂青，正式洽購版權並改編為荷李活電影《無間道風雲》，更榮獲奧斯卡金像獎。誰說香港沒有創作人才？
創作人放眼世界，參考他人的創作並非醜事，但大前提是必須尊重版權。荷李活也可以名正言順地購入港產片《無間道》的版權，香港電視劇若要「參考」外劇，能夠尊重別人的創作心血，相信也會得到別人的尊重。一家電視台被指涉嫌抄襲模仿，觀眾理應可以運用消費者力量，用手中的遙控器投票，但香港電視台佔用的是極珍貴的免費電視頻道，免費電視牌照只得兩個，即使有財團申請加入免費電視行列，成事仍是遙遙無期。沒有創意、懷疑抄襲的電視劇充斥香港，主要原因是免費電視廣播缺乏競爭。如果要在電視台激勵創意，推動本土創意產業，電視廣播政策必須改變──開放免費電視頻道，打破壟斷，打破慣性收視，引入競爭，有創意的電視劇才有出頭的機會。
Glossary
store
If you set great store by something, youconsider it to be important.
hero
the main male character in a story, film etc.
fancy
If a thing catches a person's fancy, it attracts orpleases him.
Galileo has its peculiarities. For example, physicistYukawa Manabu (its hero, played by FukuyamaMasaharu) typically covers his nose with his handwhen he ponders on a case. In his laboratory there is ablackboard cluttered with incomprehensiblemathematical expressions. When they viewed the firstepisode of The Mysteries of Love, people immediatelynoticed its many similarities with the Japanese series.
Lau Ka-ho, producer of the The Mysteries of Love,said, "We are creative workers; we never copy!" Thatmay be the case in law. Furthermore, if the heroes andheroines of the two series deal with entirely differentcases though they have similar capacities and appearin similar sets, TVB's series can hardly be called acopy in law. Nevertheless, though what TVB has doneis legally defensible, it does not follow that the series isrespected.
It is absolutely wrong to say Hong Kong peopleare not creative. A few years ago, Infernal Affairs woncritical acclaim and was a huge box-office success. Itsplot of the police and a gang infiltrating into each otherwas extremely well received. Its script caught thefancy of a Hollywood filmmaker, who acquired therights to it and remade it as The Departed, which wona few Oscars. Who says Hong Kong lacks creativepeople?
It is not shameful for creative workers to open theireyes to the whole world and learn from others' works.However, it is of overriding importance to respectcopyrights. The Hollywood filmmaker acquired therights to the script of Infernal Affairs, a Hong Kong film.If Hong Kong TV stations want to learn from foreignseries, they ought to respect their creators' pains. Ifthey do so, they can conceivably command respect.
One would think that, when a TV station is called acopycat, viewers may exercise the right they have asconsumers and vote with their remotes. However,Hong Kong TV broadcasters occupy valuable free TVchannels. Only two free TV programme servicelicences has been issued. Even if businesses apply forsuch licences, their applications will not be granted inthe foreseeable future. Hong Kong TV series lackoriginality and may be full of plagiarisms mainlybecause there is little competition between the free TVprogramme service licensees. To encourage them todo creative work and to develop Hong Kong's creativeindustry, it is necessary for the government to changeits policy on TV broadcasting. Only if it opens up thefree TV channels and brings in competitors to breakthe monopoly up will people break themselves of theirviewing habits. Only then will creative Hong Kong TVseries come to the fore.
明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm
重模仿輕原創創意產業事倍功半
明報社評
2010.05.31
無綫電視劇《談情說案》被指為山寨版日劇《神探伽利略》，引來日本傳媒關注及日本網民批評。要在法律上指證某一作品屬抄襲，十分困難，然而，《談》劇不論男女主角的物理學家及警察身分、場景設計、男主角說話神態等，都似曾相識，貌似《神》劇，難逃被指模仿之嫌。港產電視劇曾經風靡全球華人，近年香港也銳意發展創意產業，但若港產電視劇只懂「參考」外劇，輕視原創，創意工業勢將事倍功半。
日劇《神探伽利略》有一些招牌特色，例如男主角福山雅治飾演的物理學家湯川學，思考案情時以手指掩鼻遮面的招牌動作；又如實驗室黑板上寫滿深奧難明的數學算式。當無綫電視劇《談情說案》播出時，觀眾立即發現兩劇有不少類同之處。
無綫《談》劇的監製劉家豪強調並無抄襲，又說「我們是創作人，肯定不會抄襲！」法律上來說，這也許是對的，若兩劇只是部分主角身分與場景類似，但具體案件內容全部不同，抄襲在法律上的確難以成立。可是，即使法律上過得了關，不代表劇集會獲得尊重。
香港人絕非沒有創意，例如，幾年前電影《無間道》叫好又叫座，警察與黑幫互派臥底的橋段大獲好評，劇本更獲外國片商垂青，正式洽購版權並改編為荷李活電影《無間道風雲》，更榮獲奧斯卡金像獎。誰說香港沒有創作人才？
創作人放眼世界，參考他人的創作並非醜事，但大前提是必須尊重版權。荷李活也可以名正言順地購入港產片《無間道》的版權，香港電視劇若要「參考」外劇，能夠尊重別人的創作心血，相信也會得到別人的尊重。一家電視台被指涉嫌抄襲模仿，觀眾理應可以運用消費者力量，用手中的遙控器投票，但香港電視台佔用的是極珍貴的免費電視頻道，免費電視牌照只得兩個，即使有財團申請加入免費電視行列，成事仍是遙遙無期。沒有創意、懷疑抄襲的電視劇充斥香港，主要原因是免費電視廣播缺乏競爭。如果要在電視台激勵創意，推動本土創意產業，電視廣播政策必須改變──開放免費電視頻道，打破壟斷，打破慣性收視，引入競爭，有創意的電視劇才有出頭的機會。
Glossary
store
If you set great store by something, youconsider it to be important.
hero
the main male character in a story, film etc.
fancy
If a thing catches a person's fancy, it attracts orpleases him.
Housing's player-referee paradox
Government-initiated measures to make property sales more buyer-friendly take effect today. But it remained uncertain last night how far the new regulations would be enforced.
Stewart Leung Chi-kin, vice chairman of the Real Estate Developers Association, reiterated yesterday that members would conform with the government demands.
However, he quickly added the association was still awaiting government replies to clarify some points of concern, and therefore was unable to issue the guidelines on sales practices to its members as expected.
The government admitted it was studying the queries raised, but expressed confidence this wouldn't prevent developers from complying.
This turn of events is puzzling. Could the uncertainty be related to the developers' unhappiness over the demand requiring them to release a price list three days in advance of sales?
In the latest round, the association also asked whether the conditions will also apply to sales of units currently leased as rental apartments.
Equally intriguingly, the MTR Corp withdrew a site on Nam Cheong station from tender a few days ago, after all applications failed to meet requirements.
Expensive land premium at HK$13 billion, or HK$6,500 per square foot, was blamed for the conservative bids.
For the project to be profitable, completed flats would have to be sold for HK$10,000 or more psf. Given the prevalent sentiment, it's a risky investment unless developers could lower the share of profits due to the government.
Is the withdrawal alarming? Not necessarily, since it wasn't the first time this has happened. In 2006, a Tsuen Wan West Station site was pulled back because of high land premium. It was retendered last year and awarded after the land premium was slashed by 25 percent.
Though nobody knows how soon the Nam Cheong site will be available for tender again, the incident does have a silver lining. Housing prices in the secondary market have dropped by 5 to 8 percent before meeting support again. The ripple effect is helping achieve the government's objective of lowering housing prices at a stable pace.
Nevertheless, there is a paradox to be considered. On one hand, it's a government priority to cool down the housing market. Increasing land supply and the introduction of administrative measures to regulate sales practices are part of it. On the other hand, public coffers benefit from land sales.
Therein lies the government's conflicting roles as a market player unwilling to dispose of land cheaply, while acting as the referee in regulating the actions of other players intending to reap profits in the free market economy.
Housing-related policies come under two bureaus. The Development Bureau is responsible for increasing land supply to stimulate housing production, while the Housing Bureau is in charge of cracking the administrative whip against unscrupulous sales practices.
Doesn't the tendency of "reasonable" land auction results or profit sharing go against the priority to precipitate a correction in the property sector? While the dilemma is not unique to Hong Kong - the mainland faces the same thing - this player-referee paradox should be weighed carefully.
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
Stewart Leung Chi-kin, vice chairman of the Real Estate Developers Association, reiterated yesterday that members would conform with the government demands.
However, he quickly added the association was still awaiting government replies to clarify some points of concern, and therefore was unable to issue the guidelines on sales practices to its members as expected.
The government admitted it was studying the queries raised, but expressed confidence this wouldn't prevent developers from complying.
This turn of events is puzzling. Could the uncertainty be related to the developers' unhappiness over the demand requiring them to release a price list three days in advance of sales?
In the latest round, the association also asked whether the conditions will also apply to sales of units currently leased as rental apartments.
Equally intriguingly, the MTR Corp withdrew a site on Nam Cheong station from tender a few days ago, after all applications failed to meet requirements.
Expensive land premium at HK$13 billion, or HK$6,500 per square foot, was blamed for the conservative bids.
For the project to be profitable, completed flats would have to be sold for HK$10,000 or more psf. Given the prevalent sentiment, it's a risky investment unless developers could lower the share of profits due to the government.
Is the withdrawal alarming? Not necessarily, since it wasn't the first time this has happened. In 2006, a Tsuen Wan West Station site was pulled back because of high land premium. It was retendered last year and awarded after the land premium was slashed by 25 percent.
Though nobody knows how soon the Nam Cheong site will be available for tender again, the incident does have a silver lining. Housing prices in the secondary market have dropped by 5 to 8 percent before meeting support again. The ripple effect is helping achieve the government's objective of lowering housing prices at a stable pace.
Nevertheless, there is a paradox to be considered. On one hand, it's a government priority to cool down the housing market. Increasing land supply and the introduction of administrative measures to regulate sales practices are part of it. On the other hand, public coffers benefit from land sales.
Therein lies the government's conflicting roles as a market player unwilling to dispose of land cheaply, while acting as the referee in regulating the actions of other players intending to reap profits in the free market economy.
Housing-related policies come under two bureaus. The Development Bureau is responsible for increasing land supply to stimulate housing production, while the Housing Bureau is in charge of cracking the administrative whip against unscrupulous sales practices.
Doesn't the tendency of "reasonable" land auction results or profit sharing go against the priority to precipitate a correction in the property sector? While the dilemma is not unique to Hong Kong - the mainland faces the same thing - this player-referee paradox should be weighed carefully.
英文虎報 Central Station | By Mary Ma
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)
