用兵要求「先發制人」，所以政制發展的諮詢還未開始，反對派早在上半年便提出懷疑二○一七是否會有特首普選，並表示不接受「翻叮」他們綑綁否決了、因而弄得對外大失民意、對內引起年青梯隊極大不滿的「○五方案」，之後更出現於諮詢之前便作「五區總辭」等奇談怪論。一言以蔽之，反對派就是要搶下先手棋，並且以總辭之類的行動，要脅其他人就範。以他們流行的說法，這是明顯的「政治惡勢力」作風。

以「翻叮」為例，他們十分喜歡這個自創的詞，最近經常使用。但是對一般市民而言，「翻叮」沒有什麼負面的意義，大不了就是不夠新鮮熱辣而已。事實上，「翻叮」是環保節約美德的表現，只有好的食物，沒有污染變壞，為求不要浪費，才會放進微波爐裏「翻叮」。政改方案只有好壞之分，毋須天天新款。只要是好的方案，「翻叮」又有何不可？

反對派反對「翻叮」的意思我明白：這方案上次我們不接受，否決了，這次再端出來，我們如果接受了，豈非自打嘴巴？我們怎能下台？

反對派死不悔改

這是反對派自己製造出來的問題，上次做錯了，死不悔改，這回又以手上的二十三票作要脅，企圖騎劫民主化循序漸進的步伐，強逼其他人屈從於他們扭曲了的意志：你們如想往前走，便要聽我的，否則就要卡死你們。這種不講道理、只講你有多少票、我有多少票的黑社會「曬馬」邏輯，正是赤裸裸的政治惡勢力。

但是社會是不停進步的，香港民主化的步伐，並不會、也不應因為有這些自命為「民主派」、但事實上是「阻撓民主派」的政治惡勢力而不努力向前邁步。因此，廣大市民也不想把當年反對派綑綁否決了的「○五方案」，原地踏步、原封不動的成為「○九方案」。

但是大家都知道「○五方案」是一個不錯的方案，我支持它，因為我一貫反對功能組別的存在，而這是唯一可以達致最後消滅功能組別的方法【註一】。因為根據目前的規定，立法會一次過消滅功能組別議席，需要得到三分之二議員贊成才能通過；亦即等於要求一半的議員決定集體自殺，這是辦不到的。但是如果要分批取消的話，就存在一定要別人比我先走的考慮，同樣難以達致共識。但是滲了區議員作為功能組別的議席，便可於二○二○年之前，一次過把功能組別議席消滅掉：二○一二年（六十加十席）：立法會議席增至七十席，地區直選及功能組別各增加五席。新增的五個功能組別全歸區議員功能組別，即區議會功能組別增至六席。

二○一六年（七十加十席）：立法會議席增至八十席，地區直選及功能組別各增加五席。新增的五個功能組別全歸區議員功能組別，即區議會功能組別增至十一席。取消立法會分組投票的安排。

二○二○年（八十席）：取消所有功能組別議席。立法會議席維持在八十席，全部由分區直選產生。

讓更多年輕區議員入立會

到了二○一六年，立法會內已有五十個直接或間接來自分區直選的議員，而當時立法會三分之二通過消除功能組別議席，只須五十三票。換句話說，傳統功能組別的三十席中，只要有三票贊成，便可一舉廢除功能組別這個易請難送的怪物。這是我所見唯一能順利由立法會三分之二通過消除功能組別議席、同時又能符合人大二○二○年實行立法會議席全部普選產生的建議。這建議並非我發明，知識產權屬於「新世紀論壇」【註二】。

反對派是完全知道這一建議的存在，而我在反對派亦有代表的「策略發展委員會」上，也曾再次提出。任何自稱反對功能組別選舉的民主派，因而都不應反對「○五方案」，尤其是不應反對在「○五方案」的基礎之上，再加以朝民主化方向前進作改良的新方案。因此，我支持把「○五方案」「加料翻叮」，或者是「○五方案2.0版本」。

而對我這個沒有任何政黨和政治利益的獨立評論員來說，「加料翻叮」能有序地釋放大量空間讓更多今天當區議員的年青新人進入立法會參政，更值得支持。在立法會中霸著議席十多二十年還不想退下的「大佬」們如還加以反對，其私心十分明顯。

至於可以加什麼料，值得大家討論。這裏可以有兩個考慮：一是，這是否符合朝向民主化方向前進這原則性要求；二是，這是否容易獲得通過。基於後者的考慮，我們不妨遷就一下反對派的一些具體要求。如果按照他們的要求加了料的話，他們還要再次綑綁否決。那麼按照人大決議，二○一二年的選舉又只好再次原地踏步，一切後果、責任完全在反對派身上，讓他們又再一次反對派本質原形畢露，內外不是人。

以我的觀察，反對派為什麼一早就宣稱不接受「翻叮」？因為他們最明白上述的道理，因而最怕「翻叮」，使他們贊成既不是，否決也不是，左右做人難，更說不出任何道理，十分被動。

因此，反對派只可能採取「你打你的，我打我的」策略，根本不談方案合理不合理、民主不民主，一味糾纏於要曾蔭權交出「路線圖」；他不交，便以此為藉口，又來一次綑綁否決，把責任推給曾蔭權。現在曾蔭權和林瑞麟都已經表了態，二○一七和二○二○普選的安排，是二○一二和二○一七兩屆特首的責任。事實上，如果今天就為以後定了案，又如何符合《基本法》中「按照實際情況」和「循序漸進」的共同要求呢？

「路線圖」由人走出來

魯迅說得好：「我想，希望是本無所謂有，無所謂無的，這正如地上的路。其實，地上本沒有路，走的人多了，也便成了路。」【註三】「一國兩制」史無前例，大家都在探索中，那有什麼「路線圖」？死要「路線圖」，還不是故意扯淡！數萬年之前，人類的祖先如先要路線圖才開步走的話，今天我們還可能會在非洲草原上，過著原始的生活，而更可能早已被淘汰絕種。

我們如果繼續原地踏步的話，根本就走不出路。我在策略發展委員會和這裏都表達過，二○一二的選舉，「大變是小變，小變是大變」【註四】，不適宜有大動作。我們只須要朝正確的方向，縱使是邁出一小步，也能提高香港內部和香港與中央之間的互信，對香港民主化的發展將有莫大的貢獻。但是這絲毫不妨礙我們市民之間展開有關政制發展路線圖的討論，因為這也是探索的重要部分。

註一：劉迺強：後浪如何推前浪，《信報》，二○○八年八月二十六日註二：新論壇對行政長官選舉及立法會選舉方案之意見、《新世紀論壇》、二○○七年四月十二日

註三：魯迅：故鄉

註四：劉迺強：大變是小變，小變是大變，《信報》，二○○八年三月四日

When I read the slogan snails without shells recently, I could not help but chuckle. Long time no see! The last time this term was used was around the handover, 12 years ago, when property prices were sky high. Back then, the democrats took to the streets, demanding housing for all snails, meaning everybody.

That seemed like a jolly good idea, and our first chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, bought it and launched the fatal campaign to build at least 85,000 housing units a year. The property bubble burst and prices tumbled. At its peak, there were estimated to be more than 1 million people in negative equity.

The same dissidents took to the streets again, demanding that the government put a stop to the price fall. This, together with the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak, ultimately hurt Tung and he resigned in 2005 after 68 consecutive months of painful deflation. The property crash was finally arrested when the administration stopped virtually all supply of government land and housing.

Unfortunately, our officials never know when to ditch a policy. After years of restricted supply of both government land and housing, prices have rocketed again. The very same democrats have reappeared in rallies, chanting the same old slogan of snails without shells.

The same holds for environmental protection issues. The people who previously lobbied the government hard to reduce vehicle emissions and build more railways, and to replace old-fashioned light bulbs with energy saving bulbs, are now fighting against the building of high-speed rail links as well as the bulb replacement programme.

Are these people really green, and what are they really up to? I can only conclude that dissidents are dissidents, and they will never pass up any chance to bash the government. They have no true convictions; only deep mistrust of the government and the chief executive, whom they regard as Beijing's puppet.

Out of this they can concoct any conspiracy theory of collusion and abuse of power for their own benefit. Following on from Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's recent policy address, dissidents dug up alleged collusion with his in-laws. Yet, these allegations are without substance. Still, the harm is done, and what can anyone do?

The silent majority is totally fed up with watching these meaningless fiascos in the mainstream media everyday. But again, what can anyone do? No one has the guts to call for an immediate stop to it. As the mainstream Chinese media is sympathetic to this nonsense, any objector would be either ostracised or shouted down. So-called public opinion is monopolised by the dissidents and manufactured at will, and the true voice of the public is totally drowned out and ignored.

I don't know what will happen, or when this nonsense will end, but the situation is unsustainable. Change is in the air. If our citizens take a proactive approach, we can surely make it a change for the better.

上周我這裏還在說「後曾時代已開始」；話猶未了，已經天昏地暗，狂風四起，曾蔭權再耐不住，要突然放假四天，暫避風浪，透透氣。但是跟以前他經歷過的困境不一樣，這一回並非忍一時之氣、避一日之風可以渡過的。

市面投訴樓價高，全政府動員解話，並承諾研究增加土地供應，但實質政策則欠奉，連新上場的金管局總裁陳德霖的一連串措施，包括把豪宅按揭降低至六成等，據他自己也聲明，只是控制金融系統的風險，並非調節樓價。

近日來，市面一窩蜂的鼓吹重新興建居屋，但是我想在這裏重申，房地產跟香港整體經濟形成了盤根錯節、你中有我，我中有你的關係。這需要系統性的一籃子解決，任何簡單的解決方案，都會很快出事，把事情弄得更糟。以居屋為例，今天計劃重新起動居屋，首先遠水救不了近火，到新有單位推出市場，最快已經是三幾年後的事情；而且到時的樓市情況不明，很有可能像當年「八萬五」一樣，一推出便把樓市推垮。

我請客、你付鈔

「慳電膽事件」中，曾蔭權被指涉利益輸送，後改為罪名較輕的利益衝突，再降為政治不敏感，全部都證明不能成立。於是矛頭一轉，改為不依法辦事，這回一箭中的，不光是反對派連聲指責，連前公務員事務局局長王永平兄，和建制派議員，都一致同意曾蔭權推行的辦法在程序上有問題，並且爭先恐後的搶加討伐，特首不但百辭莫辯，連找下台階都有困難。

其他如邱騰華弟弟改建舊樓，曾蔭權弟婦成功索償迷債等莫須有罪名，也一一被傳媒炒熱。雖然事後一切證明無聊，但有關官員不但已經被整得灰頭土臉，神色張惶，而且還無辜禍及親友。我們本來已經怕字當頭的官員，以後只會更加不想做事，香港各方面更加不會有任何進展。政府寧願讓事情爛到、臭到所有人都忍受不了，自然形成了不能不處理的共識，才「順應民意」採取一些「貼膠布」式止血措施。

一些現眼報的例子是：一個政府要推行的環保政策，自己不想承擔慳電膽有關成本，又不敢迫兩家電力公司就範，更不想下行政命令做醜人；竟然要不依法規地逼使全體市民長期付貴電費，市民短期有表面的「著數」，但卻因而要長期資助兩電的利潤。

另邊廂，在經濟環境還未完全好轉，私人企業普遍不會加薪的背景之下，包括紀律部隊在內的公務員薪水全部不減反加，表面上安撫了十六萬公務員，但卻得罪了一大片僱主和沒有加薪的廣大受薪階級，當中不少是為這安撫措施買單的納稅人。

政府為了如期開始興建高鐵，卻又不想做醜人依法徵地，於是索性買怕，「特事特辦」，以「超級肥雞餐」特別高額收菜園村的地。

三項加起來，弱勢政府「我請客，你付鈔」的新作風，已經清楚浮現。這種推卸責任，拆東牆、補西牆的做法，只會一組一組地分別惹得愈來愈多的市民反感，政府只會更加弱勢。

刁民當道、政府弱勢

更糟的是，政府這樣做，後患無窮。因為它陸續開了很多不良的先例，而每一個惡例都指向一個方向：不管有沒有事實、有沒有道理，誰夠惡、夠大聲、夠人多勢眾，政府便會破例遷就。這樣下去，香港政府依法辦事的傳統便慢慢被侵蝕至蕩然無存。而另一方面，因為有政府在壓力之下會破例改變遷就的先例和因而造成的期望，自然會鼓勵無事喊三聲。不管有理無理，第一時間罵政府「官商勾結」、「親疏有別」、「私相授受」、「壓迫弱勢社群」、「忖摸上意」、「聽命北京」，包保沒錯，而且是零風險、零成本的買賣：罵錯一百次，起碼九十五次都多少有著數，而只須一次中寶，便會盤滿缽滿。罵政府只賺不賠，自然刁民更加當道。政府因而更加弱勢，更加要千方百計茍且求存，終於致香港於萬劫不復之地。

最近不少論者都不約而同的指出，社會上愈來愈多人懷念董建華。他這個人不懂做事，但未至於不依法胡來。最重要董建華有使命感，反對派砍了他的雙手，他兩腳還死踢；連他兩腿都斬掉，成了肉團，他還想噴口水。但曾蔭權只承諾「做好這份工」，而開始時這份工似乎不包括他的家人被誣蔑的。而他今天已經被搞到焦頭爛額，灰頭土臉，還要他硬著頭皮做醜人，去推一個還未開始談判、反對派就已經翻了台的政改。

對一個沒有強烈信念和使命感的人來說，我的能力就是這麼大，招數就是這樣多，作為打工仔，我拿了半斤，已經付了八両半，已經對得起老闆有餘，你還要我怎樣？根據這邏輯，我們的確很難要求一個打工仔作更多的「犧牲」。起碼在未來兩年半，大家只能認命，並且祈禱反對派不要玩得太過火而已。

這裏我們不妨問一下，香港為何會陷落於這個惡性循環中？

反對派的標準答案是：沒有民主，被中央「欽點」的人，假「小圈子選舉」成了特首，沒有認受性所致。果真是這樣嗎？除非有人能告訴我，普選產生的特首，就不會被整。不然的話，如果明天梁家傑通過一人一票當選特首，天天被人這樣整的話，他也同樣會是灰頭土臉，寸步難行的。

不信，我們毋須往遠處找，看看由普選產生，而且還高票當選的「中華民國總統」馬英九，他的處境也不見得太好。原因在於，在台灣有很大的一部份市民認為在凌駕於一般的道德和法律之上，還有一個最高的道德，就是「台獨」。馬英九只要不正面支持台獨，他就不是好東西，就要反對他。

反對派路線錯誤

香港也有這樣的一些人，他們認為凌駕於一般的道德和法律之上，還有民主這絕對真理。香港因為沒有普選產生特首，所以他是欽點的，他聽命於一個更加不民主、由共產黨專政的中央政府。因此，香港是中國「殖民地」，特首是「傀儡」，更加不是好東西，一定要千方百計把他搞臭搞垮。為了達到這一目標，說謊、造謠等，都是無可厚非的，至於利用外力，更是必要之惡。反對派經常說：孫中山和毛澤東都利用外力，有何不可？他們堅持從來沒有提出過獨立的要求，不搞港獨。但是很明顯，他們也絲毫不諱言，香港跟中國要分清你我：香港只在名義上是中國一部份，不搞國防和外交，除此之外，香港要享受沒有極限的更高度自治。簡而言之，就是「獨港」。

我們先不評論這種觀點的對錯，單從現實出發，易地而處，如果我是中央決策階層，我肯定要處處設防，免出亂子，丟掉烏紗。民主發展的步伐，因而會放慢。反對派目前的錯誤路線，結果只會害了香港，害了香港的民主發展。政改馬上要展開，民主化一步一腳印的走，逐步增強香港內部和香港與中央之間的互信，是真正愛港、愛民主的道路。希望這回大家走好，別再自誤自殘了。

While I am a known staunch supporter of the construction of the high-speed railway linking Shenzhen, I am not supportive of paying too much compensation to reacquire the land in Tsoi Yuen Village for the future repair yard.

The compensation package is too complicated to set out here. In sum, however, it was a whopping HK$2 billion for 25 hectares of agricultural land in a remote area of the city. This was unprecedented and government officials assured us this is a special case that will not re-occur in the future.

While we fully understand the sentimental value of homeland to the 160 households living there for decades, and the hardship involved in their relocation, together with the pressure for a quick settlement on the part of the government to avoid further delay in the much overdue construction, the rules are there and there is a limit to how much they should be bent. Most people across the political spectrum agree that this time our government is bending too much, and it will inevitably set a bad precedent for the future.

Many of the much publicized Ten Major Infrastructure Projects are still in their preliminary stage, and land reacquisition will soon take place in many different parts of Hong Kong. It is unimaginable that the current compensation package will not be used as a reference. In particular, people will make all kinds of excuses to build another “special” case for special treatment, and in the course of doing so, some politicians will be more than happy to lend their helping hands to win votes and influence public decision.

Over-compensating the landlords and tenant villagers in Tsoi Yuen Village will make future negotiations much tougher and of longer duration, and the government will always end up paying more to those who shout the loudest, and who have politicians as their allies. This in turn will spill over into other areas and invite more protests, which will further enhance our culture of crying babies, protesting for anything and everything.

This will become a vicious cycle.

The Executive Council has just given a green light to the construction of our high-speed railway amid a recent surge of objections. The plan still has to go through the Legislative Council next month to get the necessary funding.

The case for this project is simple: the mainland is building a national network of high-speed railways which will greatly enhance connectivity among major cities in the country, and Hong Kong just cannot afford to be left out of the game. Otherwise the result is certain marginalization. On the other hand, once plugged in, the rail links contribution to future development of the city will be huge. Hong Kong will be more in tune with the country’s rapid growth.

The case against it is somewhat more complicated. There are the usual dissident politicians who will object to anything and want everything. On this issue, they are against the site chosen for the repair yard, and support villagers’ demands for higher compensation, but at the same breath, they seem to want to scrap the entire project. They don’t know what they are talking about, but we all know what they mean.

There is a much larger group of young people who on the face of it look and sound like the dissident politicians. We don’t know what they are talking about, but if listened to carefully, an undertone of class-struggle can clearly be detected. What they really mean is, “I am not happy, because every benefit is likely go to the big real estate developers. I don’t care if Hong Kong will become marginalized to the point of being an agricultural economy, because there is nothing in it for me in the present setting of ‘collusion between government and business’.”

The frustration among the younger generation is real and cannot be ignored. Our government withheld land sales for years pushing real estate prices to world records, while today even the middle-class is deprived the opportunity of buying their own flats and are forced to pay exorbitant rents for living quarters which can only be described as tiny by any standard. The Gini’s Coefficient which measures the income disparity in a society has long been in the danger zone and is getting worse. If I were someone in Yau Ma Tei looking for a job while reading the much publicized story of the HK$500 million duplex, I would say, let’s go to hell.

So far, I have to admit that the West Kowloon Station looks and smells like a re-run of the old real estate scam. It is now up to the government to prove otherwise to gain popular support for the whole project.