Sunday, February 16, 2014

Letter to Hong Kong -- February 16, 2014

"Freedom of information is another core advantage that Hong Kong offers businesses. From getting a driving license to checking your Facebook account, reading the daily news or researching potential business partners, Hong Kong is committed to transparent, timely and reliable information", -- including, and I continue to quote, "constitutionally-guaranteed free press and freedom of speech."

This is how Invest Hong Kong, our government's agency tasked with attracting foreign direct investment, has been describing one of Hong Kong's key advantages to potential inward investors on its website. This is how our government describes Hong Kong to our external investors. However, domestically, we see clearly that, our press freedom is clearly under threat.

Just within this past week, two reports painted an increasingly gloomy picture of our media freedom. First, the Committee to Protect Journalists, an independent, non-profit organization based in New York, said that Hong Kong's media freedom is "at a low point," while observing financial pressures and physical threats made against our media, and self-censorship not only among media owners but even among some reporters.

Then, another non-profit organization based in Paris, Reporters Without Borders, also said in its annual press freedom report that our media independence "is now in jeopardy." They even pointed out what they believed is the cause of the problem as "the Chinese Communist Party's growing subjugation of the Hong Kong executive and its pressure on the Hong Kong media."

As if the two recent incidents – being respectively the replacement of Ming Pao's editor despite strong protest by the paper's present and past reporting staff, contributors and readers, and the allegation of vanishing advertisements by the owner of AM730 -- weren't enough, on Wednesday afternoon, one of Hong Kong's most famous radio talk show hosts and also one of the harshest critics of Hong Kong's chief executive and government overall, Li Wei-ling, was sacked without reasons by her employer for more than nine-and-a-half years, Commercial Radio.

Ms Lee said in her press conference on Thursday that she had no doubt, "100 per cent sure," that the CY Leung administration was behind her dismissal, in another move to suppress the freedom of the press and the freedom of speech here. As Commercial Radio will have to enter into negotiations for the renewal of its license in the coming years, and the eventual decision will have to be made by the Chief Executive-in-Council – and we have all seen how the Chief Executive-in-Council had previously turned the recommendation by the Communications Authority upside down in the episode of Hong Kong TV's free terrestrial television license application – such a speculation is not without reasons.

And with the previous allegations by fellow Chief Executive candidate Henry Tang in the 2012 CE election campaign, that Mr Leung in 2003 had actually proposed in the Executive Council to shorten the term of Commercial Radio’s earlier license renewal, also out of retaliation against sharp criticism of the government by its then talk show hosts, one can’t help but feel a sense of déjà vu. If it could happen before, it is not unreasonable for Commercial Radio to be worried that it may happen again when it comes time for it to renew its license.

OK, it is true that Ms Li has not provided solid incriminating evidence to back up her allegations, yet, but how could she? On the other hand, too many things have happened in too little time, particularly in a year of constitutional reform negotiations and a possible run-up to the Occupy Central campaign. It is totally logical to believe that silencing the media would be of a high priority to the powers that be, whether here locally, or from Beijing.

So we the people of Hong Kong need answers. We need answers from Commercial Radio, why it dismissed Ms Li with no warnings and why it had to do it now. We need answer from the government, which has so far said that this incident was just a private personnel matter in a private company. Oh no, this is a licensed broadcaster using public airwaves, regulated by the government, so the regulator has a duty to the public to get to the bottom of this.

In just a few short days' time, many of my friends have come to me to tell me their concerns about Ms Li's sacking. And don't get me wrong, many of them also told me that they did not particularly like or enjoy Ms Li's abrasive style or tone. They are not her fans, but they treasure her voice and her presence. This is what’s so precious about the core values that Hong Kong people still holds in our own selves – our tolerance and indeed insistence on diversity and free speech. And we know a lie when we see one. And, more importantly, when pressure comes, we stand up.

So, to our friends in the media, hang in there. We know these are difficult times that you are facing, but we are with you, and we need you to guard against self-censorship. Hong Kong needs your independent voice.

A young mother told me a few nights ago, she now fears for her kids' future, a future where people would figure out what they are supposed to think, and just think that way. This would not be her Hong Kong anymore. She asked me to do something. We all have to do something. And let's start by standing up firmly and telling everyone around us that we will do all it takes to defend our press freedom, and our freedom to think. This is going to be a long battle, and this is only the beginning.

Friday, February 14, 2014

就施政報告致謝動議辯論 第五節 管治、政制發展及地區行政 發言稿

1. 主席,我最後這段想講講新聞自由,我穿的是香港記者協會的新聞自由 T恤。

2. 好多位議員都剛才已經提過,單是在過去一個星期,已經有兩個國際傳媒監察機構分別,不約而同地,發表了香港新聞自由的「絕望真相」,第一個是「保護新聞工作者委員會」,他們指出的,是香港的傳媒編採自由正是處於低點(at a low point),鎮壓的手段,包括財政上的施壓,甚至人身安全的威脅,唔駛講都是在講例如AM730和蘋果日報等等的傳媒機構的老闆,都承認他們被中資機構等抽起廣告,這就是財政壓力,巧合地這兩個機構的老闆,亦有被襲擊、屋企閘門被撞毀,被人留低開山刀同斧頭這些暴力和恐嚇,就業人身安全的威脅啦。

3. 另一個報告,來自無國界記者,他們形容香港的編採自主處於危險的情況(in jeopardy),他們更直接指出,這些干預是來自中國共產黨,和黨直接操控香港的行政機關。

4. 這幾天,全城關注的,是商台突然解僱李慧玲事件。李慧玲昨日已經講得好清楚,她認為梁振英是百分百與這事有關。無錯,李慧玲暫時無提出很確實的證據去證明,但要求佢做得到咁,其實亦很不合理;喂,自我審查,話明是自我,人地點證明呀?相反,其他傳媒機構面對的打壓,一浪接一浪,無可能是巧合!客觀結果是最重要,客觀結果就是,批評政府的聲音被針對,批評政府的聲音越來越少!

5. 炒人日日有,但無理由無解釋嘛!商台今次處理李慧玲,與以前商台炒人,都有多些解釋,都有管理層出來,今次只有位「首席智囊」講吓,但講講吓又唔代表管理層,咁即係算點?

6. 昨晚我去了一個業界春茗,好多人都問我,李慧玲件事點呀?喂,你們立法會要做多啲嘢啦!不過,好多位朋友都同我講,他們其實唔係咁鐘意佢,未必完全同意她的風格,更加未必完全同意她的立場,不過,他們重視的是香港的多元化聲音。

7. 有一位行家,她是個媽媽,她形容這是比國教更嚴重,因為如果香港變了一言堂,這個香港就不是她想她的孩子成長的香港。

8. 主席,香港人是有眼睇的,唔好諗住可以指鹿為馬。我大概無時間詳細討論政改的問題,不過我堅信的是,香港市民睇到你們的建議的時候,有無篩選,唔駛不言而喻,係一眼就見得清清楚楚!今日仲聽到有些建制派議員口口聲聲話,維護香港利益,維護北京利益咋嘛?香港無真普選,你們不要自欺欺人,你們維護自己的既得利益,香港只會繼續不能管治,越來越不可管治,這才是真正的永無寧日!

就施政報告致謝動議辯論 第四節 人口青年教育人力藝術文化及體育 發言稿

1. 主席,有關人口、教育及人力發展,政府在今年《施政報告》中,只繼續拋出各式各樣「短期」或「即食」措施,只求「即時效應」,以暫時掩飾教育設施、學位、人力資源不足等問題,但對於各項的長期發展仍然採取「迴避」態度 ,部份措施甚至似乎只為服務內地人口,以配合國家發展需要為先,完全忘記香港市民的需要。香港不自強,點可以配合國家?

2. 只講同內地融合,漠視紓緩中港矛盾,又係嗰句只會車毀人亡。要配合國家發展,香港的視野更不能只有中國,我們更要加強年輕人「國際視野」,培育人材。

3. 根據中央政策組及相關部門的研究指出,香港近年在創意產業的大部份情況是「平均工資太低、有工冇人做」,導致嚴重人才流失。我們要「開拓市場、支援新企業」,擴大政府及本地機構的孵化計劃範圍,為他們創造本土市場,包括政府優先採購新創本地企業產品和服務,吸引更多本地人才留在本港發展才是最重要,更有利各行各業。對於「推行內地大學升學資助計劃」,為什麼只是針對內地大學?要到海外大學升學,就只有 100名額的獎學金,仲要係知名大學。點解去海外大學就只幫精英,去內地就不設名額上限?這種「大細超」政策,絕對不配合香港這個國際城市。除此之外,我認為政府更應主動與海外大學、國際企業、科研機構合作推行實習計劃,有待更多人才回港後分享𣎴同經驗,啟發更多年輕人投身科技和創新。

4. 當然,只把香港學生推去內地和海外,也沒有處理本地大學學位不足問題。政府政策掃完D學生去讀副學士,但又冇銜接,結果而家又想掃哂D學生去內地丶去海外,苦了一代又一代的年輕人,並非施政報告所講「各展所長,得以發揮」,相反是政府非常不負責任!

5. 對於教育發展,電子學習在多個先進國家是早已被推動的首要項目。香港政府於 1998年推出第一個資訊科技教育策略,至今已整整 15年,可是仍然未能向全港所有學校提供資訊科技基礎建設,一直缺乏電子學習的「全面計劃」。我希望政府能盡快為全港約 1000 間中丶小學建立及提供「最基本的第一步」覆蓋校園 Wi-Fi無線網絡,項目估算約為 4億港元。最近教育局向財委會攞3千5百萬為100間公營中丶小學建設他們最基本的網絡設施,但自己都知仲有九成即 900間學校還未開始!區區幾億元,為這一代年輕人創造他們的未來,你每拖一年,就多一年的學童不能受惠!

6. 另外,我亦認為教育局正進行的電子教科書發展不應與其他電子學習策略掛勾。電子書或所謂電子教材推行需時,涉及很多利益,包括書商,但搞好基建是完全另一件事,你不要再撈到亂哂!局長,我和教育界的朋友清楚向你要求,三年之內攪掂全港學校的基本網絡設施!不可再拖!

7. 有關教育課程改革的評估措施, 2014「數碼21」資訊科技策建議把程式編製納入中、小學基礎教育,但教育局至今仍把小學電腦 / ICT課程納入為常識科部份,及使用 1999年版本初中電腦課程綱要,課程早已𣎴合時宜。教育局必須立即應全面檢視及提供適時的課程指引,提升小學及初中電腦科課程水平。

8. 前幾日,有一間小學20多位同學到立法會參觀,我有機會同佢地及老師倾左一個鐘頭,佢吔亦主動提到電子學習。老師專登問佢哋,等D同學自己話我聽:第一,學校嘅上網是否佷慢?全部同學都話係。第二,問同學一人一機好,定係好似你哋教育局話,兩丶三個人分一部機好,全部都話梗係一人一機啦!局長,請𣎴要自欺欺人。

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

就施政報告致謝動議辯論 第二節 土地、房屋、交通、 環境及保育 發言稿

1. 主席,來到辯論的第二節,首先我想講一下,香港面對土地的迷思。地少人多,這點講都唔駛講啦,香港人口越來越多,我們香港人聲都無得聲下,你俾我就收,咁就梗係要「盲搶地」啦。既然要搶地,有啲人就要打郊野公園的主意了,竟然有大嶼山發展諮詢委員會成員敢話,「唔見得太多人去郊野公園」,我唔知佢自己去唔去行山爬山啦,喂,多人去那些就不是郊野公園,係市區啦!

2. 主席,其實我是不反對發展的,我認為多數香港人都是如此,其實我們亦了解香港如果不透過適度的製造土地,包括填海等,真的不夠土地,無論是居住和工商業的發展,都是自己限制自己的。但我們一定要找到平衡,這個平衡不只是以保育和發展之間的平衡,也是要好好回答這些問題:發展利益是否繼續傾斜於地產商?發展目的是否只顧居住房屋,沒有平衡地顧及工商業、經濟發展和製造就業的需要?一個無平衡經濟、就業和休憩、保育的城市,會變成一個只是可以睡覺的睡房,以一個城市來說,就是一個生活質素極低的死城。

3. 我們在供求方面也要找到平衡。我們意思是,我們現在面對需求不斷增加,因為香港沒有對單程證入境人士任何的審批權,但供應就必然地受到限制,土地是有限的,用途也不只居住的,還有工商業、教育呢,我們政策只顧增加土地供應,對不斷增加的需要,卻視若無睹。唔駛講都知,這種土地和人口政策,最後一定車毀人亡!

4. 除了土地的迷思,還有對環境、對廢物處理的迷思。這兩年來,環境局局長你都算辛苦了,頭頭都撞哂板,唯一被人讚嘅,就是大徙鬼,哈,佢都算受歡迎了。不過其他重要的事,不可以擴建堆填區,焚化爐又十劃都未有一撇,你要郁這麼些項目?先搞掂源頭減廢啦,但你想垃圾徵費?你搞掂回收產業先啦。嗱,這些問題的確一環扣一環,但如果你做A前要先做B,做B前要先做C,做C前要先做返A,我哋些電腦程式這些叫做infinite loop,中文叫做無限循環,即是永遠都出唔到去,什麼也做唔到。

5. 點解我們社會不可以話,A、B、C、D, 全部一齊去做,這個我們電腦人叫 multicore(多核芯),大家都知道 multicore智能電話快幾多啦!如果不是這樣,你只會跌入利益團體的圈套,永不超生。時間關係,今天我不打算同大家詳細討論這些政策的細節,只想指出,我們香港面對的困局,廢物處理是個很好的例子。局長,我希望你可以頭鎚頂破這個infinite loop,我們香港才可以向前走。

6. 主席,講住咁多先。

就施政報告致謝動議辯論 第一節 經濟發展 發言稿

主席,我相信無人可以否認,創新科技是發展多元經濟、創造就業及提升競爭力的重要動力 。成立或者說重設創新及科技局,是我們IT界爭取多年的,所以我們歡迎施政報告確定政府重新啟動成立創新及科技局。但是從施政報告的措辭以至之後局長出席委員會討論時的說法,實際詳情欠奉,到現在可能是唯一未向立法會事務委員會報告詳情的施政報告內容,這是不理想的。


  • 當局希望香港在全球及區域創新及科技中擔當甚麽角色,創新及科技局的定位是甚麽?
  • 如何制訂清晰、全面及具前瞻性的科研發展策略,加強政策的靈活度和延續性?
  • 如何有效分配公共資源於創新科技和資訊科技上,並提升資源運用效率?
  • 如何理順和突破不同政府部門和公營機構之間的行政壁壘?
  • 如何將香港出色的基礎研究產業化,和本地開發者的新產品和服務,優先應用於不同行業?
  • 如何改進創新科技教育,培養有獨立思維的人才和年輕精英,吸引他們投身科技界?
  • 如何促進香港與內地和國際之間的學術、人才交流,科技與企業的合作?
  • 如何吸引本地和海外企業在香港投資研發工作,特別是便利國際領先科技企業在香港建立營運中心,製造優質工作機會?
  • 如何推廣科技對社會和未來發展的重要性,營造重視創新和科技的文化?

1. 科技政策必須常規化、制度化



2. 突破官僚思維


3. 增加前瞻性研究,整合諮詢架構


4. 提升績效,支援技術轉移及商業化


5. 促進本地科研成果商品化,支援本地生產


6. 改善科技教育,培育創意人才


7. 改善業界形象,營造重視科技文化


8. 面向內地,放眼世界


9. 捍衛網絡自由