香港新浪網 MySinaBlog
劉廼強 | 29th Dec 2009 | 信報 | (60 Reads)

我對所謂「公投」的批判,即日便被網上憤青圍毆,但是除了無知地問「唔驚就唔會寫咁大篇文!」之外,沒有一拳是到肉的。次日我在本報再被評論員圍毆,但是很對不起,我的論點始終無人正面作出反駁。(我在這裡每周都寫「咁大篇文」,而且在這些憤青們未出世便開始寫了,至今仍未驚死。岸然兄,你不是如此見識吧?至於練乙錚,請你仔細閱讀《信報》有關我發言的報道,才填你的「上大人,孔乙己」交稿吧。蘇東波看佛印就說看到狗屎,而佛印看蘇學士就看到了金佛。請驗眼、靜心、保重!)唯一值得討論的,還是所謂「公投」的問題,即如何量度民意的標準。在這點之上,岸然兄也不得不承認:「如何解讀各類投票結果甚而是各類民調,從來就是人云亦云,為目的而堆砌的道理,也是一種道理。」原來如此,那他所謂「七百萬人的意願」,其實只不過是「為目的而堆砌的道理」。但再次對不起,我不能苟同這「也是一種道理」,這只是反對派強姦民意的歪理!

 (閱讀全文)

劉廼強 | 25th Dec 2009 | China Daily (Hong Kong Edition) | (54 Reads)

When leaders from 25 countries, notably the US, China, Brazil, India and South Africa, met at the night before the closing of the Copenhagen Climate Summit to draft an agreement, they did it deliberately away from the all-or-nothing normal procedures of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which was doomed to end on a deadlock.

It was therefore a desperate compromise based on the belief that any deal is better than no deal. Should these leaders come home empty-handed, the letdown would have been too big for many people around the world to accept.

The resulting document, the Copenhagen Accord, calls for reducing emissions to keep temperatures from rising more than 2C above pre-industrial levels, and that richer nations will finance a $10 billion-a-year, three-year program to fund poorer nations’ projects to deal with drought and other impacts of climate change and to develop clean energy. A goal was also set to mobilize $100 billion a year by 2020 for the same adaptation and mitigation purposes.

Still the draft was protested by several nations that demanded deeper emissions cuts by the industrialized world. Another compromise was struck, and the 194-strong conference only “took note” of the paper, implying that the countries that are parties to the UNFCCC may decide to sign or not to sign on, leading to some misreporting that the agreement is not “legally binding”, though it seemed that ultimately there will be at the most only five reluctant countries which will not put their signatures on it.

As it now stands, reduction commitments of signatory countries laid out in the Copenhagen Accord will not be enough to limit global warming to an increase of 2C, which some island nations have deemed too big. According to some experts, the world’s temperature is already on its way to increase by 3.9C above pre-industrial levels.

On the other hand, the advanced countries’ $100-billion-a-year climate aid goal by 2020 to fund poorer nations’ projects to deal with impacts of climate change and to develop clean energy clearly falls far short of the actual needs of the recipients.

As such, the Copenhagen Accord is just a halfway house, paving way for another year of negotiations to iron out myriad issues leading to the next major UN climate conference in Mexico City in 2010. As major emitters, both China and the US have indicated their willingness to provide assistance for poorer countries and to have their own climate protection measures monitored, albeit differently. The UN chief calls it “an essential beginning”.

China stuck to its pre-summit commitment of carbon emission intensity reduction of 40-45 percent, which is by far the highest target set down by any participating country in the Copenhagen summit. As a developing country, it insisted that its mitigating actions would not be subjected to being measured, reported and verified as applicable to developed countries. As expected, this has drawn a lot of harsh criticisms from developed countries which then used it as an excuse to ease their own commitment. China has to put its feet down to draw the line, or else other developing countries such as India and Brazil will be subjected to the same unreasonable pressure.

In any case, China has now committed to drastically reduce its carbon emission and at the same time develop its economy, an endeavor no other countries have ever tried before. This is an unprecedented challenge of Hercules proportion that China has to confront almost entirely on its own, for taking up much funding from developed countries would be seen as snatching resources from other developing countries more in need. Knowing this self-respecting country, China will bite the bullet in its traditional self-reliant manner, strictly adhere to its international commitment regardless of cost and effort, and will go out of its way to help its Third World brothers.

This tough decision will force China to take on an entirely different path of development, one that does not take environmental targets as constraints but positively as growth engines. This philosophy has already been embedded in the 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-10) and the 17th National Congress of the CPC, and it is going to be refined further with funding earmarked to ensure the goal is reached. It will in turn spearhead breakthroughs in new renewable energy, zero emission transportation, anti-soil-erosion and anti-desertification technology, modern agriculture, energy efficient technology, and clean production technology, just to name a few.

With the largest number of scientists and engineers and also the largest market in the world, destiny has thrust upon China to become the world leader in these areas by 2020. If China succeeds in this new direction, and judging from its past records, there is a high probability it will. This is an enviable position, which the European Union and the United States both aspire but are quite unlikely to achieve as much. In addition to sustained high growth, China will then occupy world technological and moral high ground. Instead of exporting toys and shoes, China will soon export electric cars and high-speed trains. US media admit that in the not too distant future, the country will have to import efficient and clean coal power plants from China.

In the process, China has also gained some invaluable experience, which will definitely be useful for other developing countries facing the twin problem of development and environmental conservation. A rising China will come with some tested alternatives of tackling this problem now common to all developing nations after Copenhagen Accord. Its efficient small-scale low-cost methane generator for example will be very useful to the tribal communities in Africa.


劉廼強 | 24th Dec 2009 | 信報 | (78 Reads)

古語有云:「衣不如新,人不如故。」王岸然兄果然「老友鬼鬼」,上周花了鴻文一半的篇幅,關心我是否犯政治錯誤,損害我跟中央的關係。雖然政見不同,岸然兄跟我一樣,都是知道自己信什麼,要什麼的人。我在上周文章中敢大罵中央「窩囊」,還在乎政治正確不正確嗎?

不過《信報》的報道都清楚指明我是以個人身份發言,那來「公然代中央放話」?如果真的「公然代中央放話」,又怎會「假傳聖旨」、政治錯誤呢?更何況香港政制發展,權在中央【註一】,是人大委員長吳邦國幾年前公開說的,不單我在座親耳聽見,當場的記者都有報道。而他這番話的根據,是中國憲法第三十一條:「國家在必要時得設立特別行政區。在特別行政區內實行的制度按具體情況由全國人民代表大會以法律規定。」而根據憲法第五十七條:「中華人民共和國全國人民代表大會是最高國家權力機關。它的常設機關是人民代表大會常務委員會。」它代表了人民的權力,理論上只有「十三億人公投」的權威才能高於它。所以,「即使香港七百萬人個個都話要改,佢(中央)都可以唔改,佢係有權唔改」,這是憲法事實,我沒有說錯。而這事實,是香港多少人上街,多少人投票所改變不了的。香港終審法院的最終裁決,我們也懂得要尊重,不會搞什麼示威、公投之類去與它對抗。全國人大決定的權威遠大於香港終審法院的最終裁決,沒有上訴的餘地,只有香港的反對派才如此冒犯。

公民黨態度飄忽

這一思維,跟革命時期的毛澤東,無疑是一致的。但問題來了:我們想在香港搞革命,即便是近年流行的「顏色革命」嗎?如果這就是反對派要搞的什麼「新民主運動」,不要遮掩閃爍,請坦白告訴市民,讓大家知所面對和抉擇(而練乙錚也來插科打諢,花了整整一篇文章東拉西扯談中國公投,卻許多基本的事實,甚至連我當了多少屆政協委員這很容易找到的簡單事實都弄錯,屬於扯淡之類。雖然稿費處於全港最高,他一周六天寫也太累了,只能天天挖空心思罵共產黨,才盡之態畢露,歇歇正好。保重)。

回頭再說香港的「變相公投」。公民黨與社民連這「美女與野獸」的組合,社民連堅持「五區呈辭」是「公投」,但公民黨態度則十分飄忽,最初定位於「民意表達」,最近才開始被社民連牽着鼻子用「變相公投」的字眼【註二】。公民黨大狀出身,當然清楚「公投」是胡扯。只是如果僅僅是「民意表達」的話,那麼表達了就是,甚至連嚴謹點的主題都不需要,也沒有清楚的結論,跟有多少人參加遊行沒有分別,只是不能隨便報大數而已;此舉不單是小題大造、勞民傷財,而且是「你請客,我付鈔」,惹人討厭。硬要標籤它做「公投」是政治需要,於男權社會中,來自金星的「美女」,只好乖乖跟着來自火星的「野獸」屁股走。

要是搞「變相公投」,而不是民意表達的話,接着下來的另外一個基本問題是:主題是什麼?「美女」跟「野獸」至今沒有共識。社民連的主題是「二○一二雙普選」,公民黨卻是「真普選路線圖」。兩者明顯有很大的距離,即便反對派的鐵票到時真的抱「公投」的心情去投票,他們也不知道到底投什麼,是投「二○一二雙普選」?抑或是投「真普選路線圖」?他們大不了只知道是反對「二○○九方案」。搞這樣沒有明確訴求的所謂「公投」,跟綑綁否決的效果完全沒有分別,毋須耍這麼昂貴的花招。

主題模糊不清

所謂「公投」的主題已經那麼模糊不清,還要加上補選這元素,問題更加複雜。補選是選人,「公投」是投議題,兩者合而為一,結果更加說不清。我不高興粗魯的「潮洲怒漢」詹培忠,把票投得可愛活像「史路比」的陳淑莊,你卻硬要說我「公投」支持你們自己也說不清楚的政治議題,豈不是「明屈」?結果怎可能服眾?

當年陳老太與葉劉對壘於馬力兄去世騰出來的議席的補選,已經不是第一次反對派想定位為「正邪對決」的補選,也是想有「公投」的效果。結果陳太勝了,但反對派也不敢說這是民主的勝利。這回不同之處是反對派自編、自導、自演,所以是全港五個區一起補選,而並非只有一個區。但是卻正正因為如此,問題又進一步複雜化:在並非五區都全勝的情況之下,結果如何評估?現在「社—公聯盟」說,以總得票的簡單多數為準。這當然是對他們最有利的低標準算法。但是如果「社—公聯盟」補選中,五個議席失其一,還可以靠大聲勉強過關;要是損失兩個議席或以上,則以扭曲為直的大狀專才,也難以說服市民反對派「公投」勝利。

不能反映民意

事實上,以補選票數的簡單多數決定市民是否支持反對派的訴求,根本就反映不了香港民意。從過往經驗,立法會補選的投票率不會超過四成,以反對派得票六成計,六四二十四,它只得到四分之一的登記選民的支持。而登記選民不到合資格選民的一半,亦即是說,反對派不可能得到香港有投票權的市民百份之十二以上的支持。反對派的所謂「公投」,真是「變相」得很;變到連多數的暴政(tyranny of the majority)都不是,只是赤裸裸的少數蹂躪多數。以最多不過香港百份之十二的民意去強加於其他人,包括香港市民和全國人民身上,這莫說不可能是「公投」,根本上連自稱是「民主」都站不住腳。說出來也會使「公投」兩字蒙羞,為世人所恥笑。

根據香港現行法規,議員可以自由辭職,你們就五人集體辭職吧。辭職後的空缺需要補選,我們就補選吧。但千萬不要侮辱市民的智慧,說這是「公投」。補選之後,反對派還是會綑綁起來,否決政改方案,那又讓他們否決了,政制原地踏步吧。反對派如此「玩嘢」,我們很無奈。而更無奈的是,事情的發展並不會到此為止,他們肯定會把事情鬧大、鬧糟、鬧僵的。

對此,我們香港減除了頂多是一成選民左右的極少數之外,對於反對派這一場破壞性極大的鬧劇,絕大部分市民是絕對無奈,覺得討厭。我也來湊興引用毛主席,我們市民對此一是不想,二是不怕。【註三】我們是堅決不會給你們嚇倒而騎劫的,放馬過來吧。

註一:http://www.zaobao.com/special/china/hk/pages1/hk070607.html

註二::請參公民黨最近的新聞稿

註三:毛澤東:現在是帝國主義怕我們的時代,一九六○年五月三日


劉廼強 | 15th Dec 2009 | China Daily (Hong Kong Edition) | (32 Reads)

Adopting athletic competitions and spectator sports as morale boosters and unifying tools is an ancient Western invention. It dates back to the Greeks, and was perfected by the Romans. With the popularization of modern media, especially the television and now the Internet, the effects of large sporting events can only be described as mesmerizing. This was witnessed at the Olympic Games in Beijing last year, and on a lesser scale, but even more exuberantly at the just completed East Asian Games.

Despite some minor logistic hiccups in the beginning, which were exaggerated in our media, the entire city was moved by the successive winning of medal after medal by our athletes. Chief Executive Donald Tsang was visibly overjoyed, along with thousands of cheering spectators at the stadium and millions who watched on TV on December 12 when our previously lackluster football team unexpectedly became the champions. Even a person like me who is not particularly keen on watching sports, and my Philippino domestic helper who is not even a citizen here, jumped up and shouted at the decisive moment when the ball was shot into the goal.

"We are not garbage!" shouted the Olympic windsurfing medallist Lee Lai-shan when she received her first gold. The agony expressed was widely echoed in the city, much tormented by unhappy incidents one after another since the handover as neighboring cities caught up, and opportunities passed by. For the past forty years Hong Kong has never been particularly strong in sports. Now with the successful hosting of the East Asian Games and the spectacular performance of the local athletes, we can prove once and for all, to ourselves and to the whole world that Hong Kong never can be written off, and given the right conditions, it will shine.

We are the legend, because our athletes have made us so. We should thank them for their years of dedicated hard work, and wish them every success in future competitions. We should also thank the organizers, because they have been subjected to tremendous pressure. Like everything in Hong Kong, there are always harsh criticisms, many of them unfounded or overblown. Whatever mishaps in the East Asian Games, they can now only be seen as minor. This is a highly successful event, and we all know it.

Let the winning spirit live on, and let us make more legends in our other endeavors!


劉廼強 | 15th Dec 2009 | 信報 | (54 Reads)

不出市面所料,民主黨的特別會員大會表決不支持「五區請辭」。但是公民黨在其影子主席李柱銘影響之下,一早已經通過特別會員大會決定參加。社民連三席,加上公民黨兩席,「五區請辭」已經勢在必行,並且很可能就在一月初,於元旦大遊行之後不久,便正式宣布。

民主黨早晚分裂

正如本報的分析,二○○九年十二月十三日是香港反對派發展的一個分水嶺。今後好一段時期,民主黨自願也好,被標籤也好,客觀上是反對派中堅持議會主義的溫和派。而且經這次會員大會之後,有些黨員會退黨;不過民主黨如決定參加的話,同樣也有另外一些黨員退黨。經過長期被李柱銘挑撥離間,拉一把,打一把,民主黨分裂是早晚的事。

但是民主黨跟民協大不一樣,它有過去數十年社運的傳統和戰鬥友誼,家底厚,凝聚力強。加上當前香港社會中支持議會主義的大有人在,不參加「五區請辭」很有市場,有可能成為溫和民主派的賣點,成了吸票機制。無論如何,當前發生的是大家經驗範圍之外的新形勢和新事物,得失如何,都只是各憑主觀去判斷,都有可能跟現實相差甚遠。

而社民連則已向街頭政治踏出了一大步,往後即使是大佬想抑制,底下狂躁之極的一班香港憤青也不會罷休,終於尾大不掉,自食其果。不知道大家有沒有留意到,近來的示威行動,都不是自動和平解散而結束,總是有上百計的年青示威者是被警方抬走的。這只是局勢在辯證發展中的一個癥兆,好戲快要開鑼。

可笑的是基本上以大律師為骨幹的公民黨,在其自承不懂政治,卻要瞎指揮的隱形主席的指揮棒之下,這批「藍血人」竟然被稀裏糊塗的社民連牽着鼻子走上街頭。他們當中有些人幻想在這他們各方面都遠遠不如社民連的新遊戲中,能拿到運動的領導權,認真幼稚之至。瞎子帶着傻瓜向着不明物體衝刺,對不起,我完全不覺得悲壯,只覺得可笑。

不參加「五區請辭」的民主黨,和其他不支持這行動的反對派散兵游勇,它們雖然明知「請辭」、「總辭」等沒有意義,只會有種種不良後果;但說到底,「泛民」這支大旗對選舉還起作用,他們絕對負擔不起分裂「泛民」這罪名。所以如無意外,到七月前二○一二年政制發展法案到立法會時,反對派一定會像二○○五年一樣,綑綁起來,把它再次否決。因為根據《基本法》,這法案「須經立法會全體議員三分之二多數通過」,即四十票。而目前立法會六十席中,非反對派的議員只有三十七個,當中主席曾鈺成自廢武功承諾永不投票,實際只有三十六票。換句話說,親建制力量需要在未來五區補選中贏了四席,才有能力通過議案。亦即是說,今天我們已經知道,否決已成定局。

政制跟社會矛盾掛鈎

只是到了今天,建制派,尤其是民建聯,都從其短期的本位利益出發,正在摩拳擦掌,企圖在補選中多拿一兩席。他們只見樹木,不見森林,結果只可能是拾了芝麻,丟了西瓜。但我不怪建制派,大局如此,這些補選席位不拿白不拿,贏了起碼助長自己的聲勢,挫反對派的氣燄,也讓大家有個交代。只是這於大局無補,政改法案被否決,眼下二○一二年選舉就是原地踏步,之後還有的殘局要收拾。

對建制派來說,反正向前邁進一步,對他們也未必一定有好處,邁不邁無所謂。他們像目前社會各方政治勢力一樣,都按二○○五年的發展作部署,即努力把否決和原地踏步的責任推給對方了事。反對派吃過上次綑綁否決之後、內外都不討好的虧,一開始就做得更加積極,希望能製造悲情,贏得同情。

但是我們不能期望社會事件會機械性重複,更千萬不要忘記,今天的政制發展,已經無可避免地跟社會矛盾直接掛鈎。香港回歸十二年,回歸不久,便碰上亞洲金融風暴,剛成立的特區政府動用超過一千億元的資金,幸運地擊退國際炒家,之後經濟經歷了連續六十八個月的通縮,到了二○○八年,才回到一九九七前夕的水平,但馬上又受到國際金融海嘯的沖擊,又再一次退縮。在這期間,經濟基礎收窄,到了只剩下搖搖欲墜的四條支柱,靠內地支援過日子。分配惡化,社會由兩頭小中間大的橄欖型,變為兩頭大中間小的啞鈴型,中產階級「日趨下流」,貧富懸殊加劇,堅尼系數已於二○○六年已上升至零點五三三,全球倒數第十八,富裕城市中排首位。按人口比例香港有全球最多的十億元富豪,但是在政府界定的貧窮線下人口卻超過一成,達七十五萬。不久之前,香港的豪宅曾以每平方米八十二萬的天價創世界紀錄,但應屆大學畢業生月薪只在一萬元之下。

二○○九年的政經形勢,遠比二○○五年壞:二○○五年經濟於低谷反彈,曾蔭權正處於政治蜜月期,「強政勵治」頗有看頭;但今天曾蔭權民望日低,已步入任末弱勢「跛鴨子」階段,而社會矛盾則長期未有解決,處於爆發邊緣。再加上急躁的政治老人和狂躁的年青人奇異的合流,事物的感受和邏輯,因而遊戲規則都已經徹底改變。

長期窩囊種下惡果

對政治老人來說,這是他們的最後一擊,所以不但背水作決戰的態勢十分明顯,而且更不惜一拍兩散。從這個角度看,未來好一段時期香港的政治和社會的動蕩,完全符合政治老人的意圖。根據其如意算盤,成功綑綁反對派再次否決政改方案,已經是他們退出政治舞台之前的很大勝利。之後如果能迫使中央改變主意,順應反對派的要求,他們就成了香港「民主英雄」,國際知名。要是中央和特區政府「企硬」,之後的動蕩,以及國家和香港付出的代價,都在在使他們心涼,浮一大白。不管結果如何,我們每一個人都是輸家,只有陳方安生、李柱銘、黎智英、李鵬飛是贏家,而他們則一丁點代價、一丁點風險都沒有。對他們來說,這是一個他們必勝的奇妙局面,而發展到今天,一切已在他們的掌握之中,朝他們設計的方向發展,香港注定在劫難逃。我雖然不同意他們的政治理念和手法,但不能不讚嘆:你好嘢!

不過回頭看看,政治老人之所以能得逞,主要還是因為他們的對手窩囊,是你、我、反對派、建制派、特區政府、中央政府等長期窩囊,才讓他們予取予攜。明天的惡果,是我們過去和現在的眾多錯誤造成的。「天作孽,猶可為;自作孽,不可活。」事已至此,大家準備好承受惡果吧!

二○○九年十二月,是香港歷史的一個重大轉折點。未來是禍是福,要看大家如何面對了。


Next