Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong by Civic Exchange

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

目錄 Contents 頁數 Pages 序言 …………………………………………………………………………………

Foreword………………………………………………………………………………

4-5

綜覽……………………………………………………………………………..……

6-7

Overview……………………………………………………………………………… 8 - 10 歡迎辭 Welcoming Speech …………………………………………………………………… 12 - 13 第一節專題演講 Panel Speakers’ Presentation (Session One) 「加強政府的領導」 "Strengthening Government Leadership" 蔣麗莉博士 - 順應香港發展促進特區管治 Dr. Lily Chiang - Sustaining Hong Kong Development with Effective Governance………….

14 - 19

李鵬飛先生 - 香港的管治與制度問題 Mr. Allen P.F. Lee - Problems with the Hong Kong System…………………………………… 20 - 22 梁國輝博士 - 行政主導的政府下的問責制度: 原則、實踐與溫「教」知新 Dr. Thomas K.F. Leung - The Accountability System in the Context of an Executive-led Government – Principles, Practice and Lessons to Learn……………………………………………………… 23 -32 李彭廣博士 - 『合一政府』或『分掌政府』？香港行政立法關係的演變和發展 Dr. Li Pang Kwong - Unified or Divided Government? The Evolution and Development of Hong Kong's Executive and Legislative Relations…………………………………………………… 33 - 41

第二節專題演講 Panel Speakers’ Presentation (Session Two) 「強化市民與政府的關係」"Enhancing Government-People Relations" 陳淑薇女士 -市民與政府的關係: 傳媒的角色 Ms. May Chan - The Relationship Between Public and the Government: The Role of the Media ………………. 42 - 47 余若薇女士 - 用人唯才 – 諮詢制度的成功要訣 Ms. Audrey Eu - Meritocracy – The Key To A Successful Consultative System……………… 48 - 53 方敏生女士 - 民間團體：政府與市民互動的中介者 Ms. Christine Fang - The Third Sector: Enhancing Government - People Interactions……….. 54 - 59 周八駿博士 - 高官問責制和公務員制度改革 1

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Dr. Zhou Bajun - The Principal Officials Accountability System and Civil Service Reform….

60 - 64

閉幕辭 Closing Speech………………………………………………………………………..

65 - 68

小組討論重點 Main Points in Table Reports 第一節：「加強政府的領導」 Session One: "Strengthening Government Leadership"………………………………

70 - 96

第二節：「強化市民與政府的關係」 Session Two: "Enhancing Government-People Relations"……………………..…

93 - 122

附件 Appendices 研討會程序表 Conference Programme ………………………………………………………… 124 主辦及協辦機構簡介 Principal Organizers and Co-organizers………………………………………… 125 - 139 專題演講嘉賓講者簡歷 Biographies of the Panel Speakers………………………………………………

140 – 157

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

序言「一國兩制、港人治港、高度自治」是一個史無前例的政治、行政和管理概念，執行時必會遇到始料不及的問题。要成功落實這複雜的概念，社會各界必需具備廣闊的胸襟，敢於嘗試創新思維和採用靈活、富彈性的手段和方法來處理各種相關問題。

過去數十年，由於具備各項內外有利的因素，加上港人勤勞工作，香港經濟得以高速發展，成績驕人，市民亦因此可享受較高的生活水平。經過歷任香港政府的努力，香港的管治制度也日趨完善。在回歸前後十數年裡，由於全球經濟一體化、區域化等急劇變化，再加上香港經濟的結構轉型，使香港遭遇不少困難，亦產生許多遭人詬病的問題：巨額財赤、結構性失業、長期的通縮、競爭力的下降、醫療、教育、社會福利開支的大幅上升、決策效率及公務員士氣低落等。這些問題的出現，都有其因素；但是，它們使社會對特區政府累積的怨氣日深，結果，社會對加速政制發展的訴求越來越強烈。

其實，要改善香港的情況，不單是政制發展的問題。循序漸進的政制發展是無可置疑的，但是社會也要同時研討其他管治要素，例如社會共融、市民向心力、資源分配、市民與政府的關係、諮詢制度、行政與立法關係、公民社會、文官制度、政府的領導和傳媒的功能。

我們三所獨立的民間智庫共同主辦的「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會，目的是要提供機會讓各階層的市民對香港的管治作深入討論、互相交換意見及提出建議。透過這個討論的平台，使我們能夠集思廣益，加強各方的了解和溝通。

香港政策研究所思匯政策研究所新力量網絡

二零零四年六月

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

FOREWORD

“One country, two systems; Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong; high degree of autonomy” is an unprecedented political, administrative and management concept. implementation would generate unforeseeable problems.

Its

The successful realization of this

complicated concept requires broadmindedness from all quarters in the community which must have the courage to try new ideas and apply flexible means and methods to deal with various related issues.

Due to different beneficial internal and external factors, coupled with the diligence of the Hong Kong people, in the past decades the Hong Kong economy grew rapidly with most enviable results.

People could hence enjoy a relatively high living standard. Through the

efforts of its governments, the governing system in Hong Kong has continuously been perfected.

In the several decades before and after reunification, because of such rapid

changes as globalization and regionalization of economy, together with its own economic re-structuring, Hong Kong has encountered not a few difficulties, giving rise to many problems for which the government has been condemned, including substantial budgetary deficits, structural unemployment, prolong deflation, decline in competitiveness, medical care, education, huge growth in social welfare expenditure, efficiency in decision-making and low morale of civil servants.

There are various reasons for the occurrence of these problems;

they nevertheless have altogether resulted in deepening the grudge the community has against the Special Administrative Region Government.

The consequence is the community’s

growing demand to speed up the development of the political system.

To improve the Hong Kong situation in fact calls for more than just political development. The gradual and orderly development of the political system is no doubt needed.

Society,

nevertheless, must also examine other governance factors such as community harmony, social cohesion, resource distribution, government-people relationship, consultation system, executive-legislature relationship, civil society, civil service system, government leadership and functions of the media. Our three independent non-government think tanks jointly organized this conference on “Lessons to Learn: Governing Hong Kong” to provide an opportunity for citizens from all sectors to discuss in depth the governing of Hong Kong, to exchange views and to make 4

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

proposals.

Through this discussion forum, we can pool collective wisdom and strengthen

understanding and communication between various sectors. Hong Kong Policy Research Institute Civic Exchange SynergyNet June 2004

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

綜覽回歸前後的「前車」，都讓今天的香港人上了一節管理一個大型國際都市寶貴的課，其中的負面訊息和積極經驗，都是值得我們今天借鑑的。香港各界仍然要不斷反思。

過去的研究和經驗告訴我們，在經濟愈困難時，人民會愈熱烈參與政治討論和爭拗；而且，多樣化就是先進社會的一個特性。故此，近期的爭議是不足為奇的。況且，香港還要面對回歸帶來無可避免的政治轉型，再加上政府未有好好運用過去行之有效的諮詢制度和行政吸納等方法，來提高它在市民心中的認受性。爭拗已經做成社會的嚴重分化，阻礙經濟與社會的轉型，禍及整個社會的各階層。我們若要扭轉這個局面，各界必須停止謾駡和互怨，而要進行理性討論、求同存異、化爭吵為共識。其實，包括工商界在內，沒有人會反對「民主」的。政治和政制的變革，當然與經濟息息相關。經過極周詳的思考和小心制訂、能順應經濟長遠發展、顧全大局、循序漸進地向適當目標推行的政改，大部份香港人是會支持的。但是，普選不是萬能的，單單改變投票制度而不改善政府的架構和運作並不足夠。

為了加強政制發展和其它政策的社會認受性，香港必需要建立有效的諮詢架構。政府近年好像未能掌握民意取向，對民意的回應太慢、不能針對要點和不夠積極。政府在採納任何重要政策前，一定要經過有效的推銷和詳盡的諮詢，真心聆聽、考慮和平衡市民的意見。它不應以固有的價值觀來分析今天的事，也不能以官僚的心態面對瞬息萬變的社會；它需要開放多些諮詢和交流渠道，容納更多民間有建設性的進言。回歸前採用的諮詢制度；地區組織的建議渠道；利用委任制度來尋覓、培育和吸納高質素的政治和行政人才等辦法，雖然未必完全適合今天的境況，還是值得現今政府借鑑。政府也可以考慮資助和運用民間智庫、學術界與其他非政府團體來匯集及分析民意。

在可見的未來，香港的政制都會以「行政主導」為軸，而「分掌政府」似乎也是不能避免的。政府應該研究怎樣把「行政主導」這個概念「現代化」、怎樣改進特首與「反對派」的溝通、怎樣改善「行政」與「立法」的關係、怎樣建立科學和專業的政策制訂架構和程序、怎樣提高公共政策研究水平、怎樣提供政制發展的基礎配套 (包括個人質素和社會機制) 、怎樣提升政黨的素質 (包括通過政黨法律及資助政黨)。當然，在「行政」上擔當重要角色的政府本身，也要與時俱進 — 透過改善它的組織和運作模式，來增加部門間的協作；提高公務員對新政治和經濟模式的適應能力；改進作出決定的能力；除掉問責官員與公務員間的矛盾；建立和嚴格執行合理的運作規則。政府也要想辦法恢復行政會的決策能力。

為了明暸民間的想法，除了有效的諮詢制度外，政府還要從其他途徑搜集社會主流意見。此類意見是會因時勢而變動，不易鑒別出來的。其中一個較為明顯的來源是傳媒。但是，在所有已發展的國家裡，傳媒都是扮演「異議者」的角色，而香港傳媒報導的真實性、可靠性和中立性許多時 6

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

都受到質疑。有人指出，傳媒不應該向社會灌輸恐慌和不滿，而應協助促進諒解及和諧。另一方面，亦有論者認為傳媒的影響力不會如一般人想像的那樣大，而且整體來說，傳媒是會盡量作真實報導的。無論怎樣，政府也應該主動想辦法引導傳媒、與傳媒合作，向社會傳達訊息；而傳媒亦應該回顧過去的做法，要公正持平地反影社會的意見，多作建設性的建議和批評。社會也需要考慮在不損害言論自由下監管傳媒。

即如傳媒，民間團體也是政府與民間的橋樑。在「小政府、大社會」的思潮下，許多政府都把部份權力轉到社會，又因中產階層的擴大，市民會不斷要求用參與式民主改進代議政制。香港的民間團體也跟隨社會、經濟及政治發展而轉變。所以，政府應該增强與民間團體的互動、互信和合作關係。

市民與政府之間的關係亦要保持平衡。美國甘迺迪總統曾說過：「……不要單問國家可以為你做甚麽事，應該問自巳可以為國家作出何等貢獻。」當香港社會出現問題時，政府的領導地位當然無可替代，但負責任的市民也應該盡力諒解政府和官員所負的重擔及他們面臨的困難和掣肘，與政府共同面對時艱，同心協力去解決問題；不能只考慮個人的利益，更需顧全社會整體的福祉。為了加深市民對社會問題的認識及鼓勵他們積極提出意見，香港需要加强公民教育。

成功的公民教育必須做到的其中一點，是能使香港市民清楚認識和理解中國國內與香港的文化差異。因為兩地的價值觀、思維和行為模式都有不同。它亦應加深市民對「一國兩制」的歷史背景和落實執行時所帶來的挑戰的認識；也要使市民明白香港的國際定位。香港也要了解它與中國大陸在經濟發展和在政制發展的相對速度若然失衡的話有可能發生的惡果；因此，兩地在這兩方面的發展一定要有良性的互動，香港的經濟和政制才可以取得成功的發展。香港需要在不損「一國兩制、高度自治」的前題下，改善和增加與中央的坦誠溝通；在討論香港問題及提出要求時，不但要考慮北京的意見，也要分析香港的轉變對中國其他省市的影響。香港要認識中國憲法與香港基本法的關係和我們的權力來源。只有這樣，才能增强中央對我們的信心，達到相互的配合，在爭取政制發展等工作上才會事半功倍。

二零零四年六月

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

OVERVIEW The pre- and post-reunification chapter is a useful lesson Hong Kong people today can learn on the management of a major international city. We today should borrow from both its negative indications and positive experiences.

All sectors in Hong Kong must continuously

undertake reviews. Past studies and experiences show that the more difficult the economy is the more actively people tend to participate in political discussions and disputes. Moreover, diversity is characteristic of advanced societies.

The recent disputes are hence not unexpected.

Hong

Kong has also to face the inevitable political changes accompanying the reunification and the government has not effectively applied such past successful tools as the consultation system and “administrative absorption” to gain more trust from the people.

Disputes have already

seriously polarized the community, obstructing economic and political reforms to the detriment of all social sectors.

To reverse this situation, we all should replace exchanges of

accusations and grudges with rational discussions, seeking common ground while setting aside differences, and dissolving disputes into consensuses. No one, including the business and industrial sectors, is against “democracy”.

Changes in

politics and the political system are of course closely related to the economy.

Most Hong

Kong people, however, would support political changes which have been thoroughly considered and carefully formulated, are beneficial to long-term economic development, have taken account of the overall situation and move gradually toward proper objectives. Universal suffrage cannot solve all problems and modifying the voting system is not adequate if the government structure and operation are not improved. To increase community’s acceptance of political changes and other policies, Hong Kong must establish an effective consultation system.

The government recently seems to be unable to

understand preferences of public opinion which it reacts too slowly to, misses the essential points of and is not sufficiently keen toward.

Before adopting any policies, the government

must promote the policy ideas and undertake thorough consultation, listening sincerely to, appraising and balancing public views.

It should not analyze today’s events on the basis of

old values or handle a rapidly changing community with bureaucratic attitude; it must open more consultation and communication channels and accept constructive suggestions from the public.

Although they may not be totally suitable for the situation of today, methods

practised prior to reunification - such as the consultation system, avenues to channel up suggestions from local bodies, as well as the use of the appointment system to identify, breed and absorb high-quality political and administrative talents - are still worthy of consideration 8

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

by the present administration for adoption.

The government should also contemplate giving

financial assistance to non-government think tanks, academics and other non-government organizations and requesting them to collect and analyze public views. In the foreseeable future, the political system in Hong Kong will primarily be “executive-led”, and “divided government” appears to be unavoidable.

The government should examine how

to “modernize” the concept of “executive-led”, how to improve the communication between the Chief Executive and the “opposition”, how to achieve better relationship between the executive and the legislature, how to establish scientific and professional policy-making structures and procedures, how to lift up the standard of public policy research, how to provide the basic supporting requisites for political development (including quality of individuals and social systems), how to upgrade the quality of political parties (including enacting laws on political parties and financial assistance to such parties).

Given its

important administrative role, the government itself must move with times – enhancing the co-operation between departments through improvements in its organizational structure and operational mechanism, uplifting the ability of civil servants to adapt to political and economic changes, improving the decision-making ability, eliminating the conflicts between the accountability officials and the civil servants, establishing and practising strictly appropriate operation rules.

The government must also find ways to restore the

decision-making capability of the Executive Council. To understand public opinion, in addition to an effective consultation system the government should also use other means to collect the principal views of the community. move with situation changes and are thus difficult to identify. sources is the media. adversarial role.

Such views

One of the more obvious

In all developed countries, however, the media always play an

The accuracy, reliability and neutrality of media reporting in Hong Kong

have been questioned.

Some feel that the media should not instill fear and dissatisfaction in

the community but should assist in promoting understanding and harmony; others think that the media are not as influential as generally perceived and that the media do try their best to report factually.

Nonetheless, the government should take initiative to guide and co-operate

with the media so as to channel information to society.

The media, on the other hand, should

re-examine their past approaches, reflect community views fairly and impartially, and offer more constructive suggestions and comments.

Society should consider overseeing the media,

provided that it will not cause adverse effect on freedom of speech. Like the media, the third sector on civil society also serves as a bridge between the government and the people.

With the thought of “small government and large community”,

many governments have passed some of their powers to their communities. 9

Moreover, with

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

the growth of the middle-class, the community will continue to demand for participatory democracy to improve the representative system.

The third sector in Hong Kong has been

changing in step with social, economic and political development.

The government should

thus strengthen its interaction, mutual trust and co-operation with the third sector. A balanced relationship should be maintained between the people and the government.

The

US President John F. Kennedy once said: “……ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

When problems occur in Hong Kong, the government’s

leading role obviously cannot be substituted.

Responsible citizens, however, should try their

best to understand the heavy load shouldered by the government and the officials as well as the difficulties and constraints they have to handle; citizens should stand by the government to face the difficulties and should work together to resolve the problems, considering not only self-interest but also the well-being of the whole community.

In order to enhance people’s

knowledge about community problems and to encourage them to make suggestions constructively, Hong Kong has to strengthen its civic education. One goal which successful civic education must attain is to ensure that Hong Kong people know clearly and comprehend the cultural differences between Mainland China and Hong Kong, differences resulting from the different values, thoughts and behaviour principles in the two areas.

Such education should also extend people’s knowledge about the challenges

arisen from the historical background and the implementation of “one country, two systems”, and should help people to understand Hong Kong’s international role.

Hong Kong must

realize the possible undesirable consequences if the relative speeds in economic and political development in the Mainland and in Hong Kong are out of balance; hence, there must be a positive interaction between the two places on these two aspects before the economy and politics in Hong Kong can be developed successfully.

Within the bounds of “one country,

two systems; high degree of autonomy”, Hong Kong has to improve and strengthen its frank communications with the Central government; when we discuss Hong Kong issues and make requests, in addition to taking account of opinions of Beijing we must also analyze the impacts of changes in Hong Kong on other provinces and cities in the Mainland.

Hong

Kong should learn about the relationship between the Constitution of China and the Hong Kong Basic Law as well as the source of our authority.

This is the only way to raise the trust

of the Central government on us and to achieve coordination so as to facilitate such exercises as striving for political development. June 2004

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

專題演講

Speakers’ Presentation

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Welcoming Speech 歡迎辭 Mr. Laurence Ho

何永謙先生 ABSTRACT An effective government should have six major duties: acquire resources for governance; adjust the social and economic activities; maintain law and order; mobilize its citizens to participate in public affairs; distribute the community resources reasonably; and maintain a high team spirit in the government. Three of these are related to the problems that the Hong Kong government is currently facing, namely, the strengthening of social harmony and community cohesion; the allocation of public resources; and the morale of civil servants. We face different problems in different periods. During the 90s, problems like high land price, high inflation rate and high salary threatened Hong Kong’s international competitiveness. We now face new challenges such as the structural economic changes and the need of political development. This conference provides us a chance to communicate freely and to produce constructive solutions for the government. We should grasp this chance to express our views and raise suggestions. 何謂有效管治？

一般而言，一個有效管治的政府；需要成功履行六項主要職能：1 1

汲取管治資源

調控社會和經濟活動

維持當地的治安及秩序

塑造市民向心力和動員市民參予公眾事務

合理分配社會資源

維持政府體系內部的團隊精神

在汲取資源方面。香港的稅制曾經是世界各地政府所羨慕的。稅率低，稅制簡單。

Mann, 1993, P.56 12

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

但又經常產生財政盈餘。近年，由於經濟轉型，地價下滑，最近，連續數年都產生巨額財赤。在這方面，財政司長長正領導政府及社會討論香港稅基的闊窄問題，我們相信，香港的財赤問題最終可以解決，不致令政府管治失效。第二、香港不單已享有一個完善的法治及司法制度，在社會、民生、經濟各方面，大都有行之有效的政策規範，使香港社會過去數年雖然遭受不少外來衝擊，各社會制度仍然如常運作。至於第三項職能，香港的紀律部隊一向保持廉潔與高效率的運作，使香港的犯罪率維持在較低水平，防務方面，更由中央政府負責，回歸後不出現任何問題。

可見，香港政府面臨的管治問題，主要是涉及其餘三項功能：

第一，社會的共融以及市民的向心力問題。香港回歸中國快將七年，在首六年半，中央政府都絕少參予特區事務。隨著國家的發展，不少民調結果都顯示市民對中央的評價一直保持較高的評分。不過，在討論未來的政制發展時，社會卻出現兩極分化的現象，其實，在一個享有言論自由的社會裡，存在不同意見，是理所當然的。不過，特區政府如何在紛爭中，準確理解市民的訴求，掌握民意，凝聚市民的支持，將是特區政府的一項挑戰。

第二，社會資源的分配問題。在全球經濟一體化，工廠北移的壓力下，香港經濟轉型帶來的影響，對社會各階層帶來不同程度的衝擊。受影響最大的當然是原藍領人士，另外，我們年青時目睹在外國出現的結構性失業問題，現在亦纏繞香港，揮之不去。另外，在劇烈競爭的情況下，很多服務行業的工作報酬，都出現偏低的情況，貧窮問題再次惡化。

最後，公務員士氣在近年確實出現問題。推行高官問責制所帶來的磨合問題，工序外判對基層公務員所帶來的衝擊，削減人手對工作量的影響等。對公務員的士氣都造成打擊。特區政府如何有效保持及提高公務員團隊內部的士氣，亦是刻不容緩的。

不同年代的香港，面對不同的考驗和挑戰。在九十年代，我們面對高地價，高通漲，高工資等問題，嚴重威脅到香港經濟的國際競爭力。九七年，特別行政區成立，選擇房屋、教育、以及安老為三大工作重點，過去數年，在三方面都取得一定成績。不過，經濟轉型，政制發展帶來更多更尖銳的挑戰，就其是在一國兩制的框架下，發展香港的政治體制，更是大家所未面對過的新經驗。今天的座談會，正會為大家提供一個機會，坦誠地，建設性地去討論如何加強特區政府在各環節的管治權威。相信大家一定會掌握機會，充份表達自己的看法和建議。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session One – “Strengthening Government Leadership” 第一節「加強政府的領導」

SUSTAINING HONG KONG DEVELOPMENT WITH EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE 順應香港發展

促進特區管治

Dr. Lily Chiang Vice Chairman of Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce 香港總商會副主席蔣麗莉博士

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

SUSTAINING HONG KONG DEVELOPMENT WITH EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE 順應香港發展

促進特區管治

Dr. Lily Chiang 蔣麗莉博士

ABSTRACT The Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce is always concerned about the economic development in Hong Kong. It used to deal with the economic and political issues separately. As the ability of the Hong Kong government is now being challenged, and decisions on public policies may have great impact on the economic environment, the Chamber no longer hesitates in involving in political discussions. Its requirement is simple; it just wants a stable, healthy environment with prospect for investment. Hong Kong is a free market with a high degree of transparency. However, the government has not done very well on certain issues such as the huge budget deficits. A survey was done last year on the issue on 07/08 elections. 75% of the respondents believed that the consultation on political development should be started as soon as possible. As the debate was being polarized, Hong Kong seemed to be less harmonious. It is hoped that the basis for any political development is to ensure Hong Kong’s long-term development and a better environment for investment. The Chamber therefore supports a step-by-step approach to handle the matter. We also need to convert disagreement into consensus. We must admit that under the principle of “one country”, the central government has the final authority on the issue of political development in Hong Kong. However, under the requirement of “two systems”, we should not neglect Hong Kong citizens’ demand for democracy. We should therefore seek a balance between them. We must meet some principal requirements before starting the political development. For example, we should question whether the political parties have policies not only on political development but also the economic development of Hong Kong. We should ensure that we have sufficient political talents and non-government think tanks; and that our citizens have 15

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

enough understanding on the recent history of China. In the process of political development, we must practice proper governance. Suitable policies and people’s acceptance are essential for good governance. Therefore, the HKSAR government has to develop an effective way for consultation and to ensure that other supporting facilities, such as the think tanks and the political parties, are well equipped. 張（炳良）教授、各位嘉賓朋友：

我很高興能夠代表香港總商會，出席今次的研討會。我們一直關注香港經濟的發展，但是在政治問題上，過去我們一向抱著「政、經分家」的態度，並不很熱衷地參與討論。不過，由於現時政府的管治能力受到質疑，而政治決策是會對營商環境構成重大的影響，故此，當我們的會員努力地應付經濟衰退，和經濟轉型所帶來的挑戰，亦引至全民都愈來愈關心政治，甚至是不得不關心政治。

其實，商界的訴求是十分簡單，我們需要的是一個穩定的、具備健康和良好發展前景的投資環境。在這方面，如果我們剔除金融風暴和「沙士」這類突發因素，引至政府有限度地干預市場，整體來說，香港是能夠維持一個高度自由的經濟體系。但是，香港政府在一些重大問題上，例如是財赤、公務員薪酬、國安法等，未能有效地處理，以至許多人認為，香港的政治體制運作失效，難以應付未來的挑戰。

商界關注政制發展

根據香港總商會在去年進行的調查顯示，超過 75%回覆問卷的會員，要求政制發展的諮詢能夠儘早展開。不過，因為「普選」爭論白熱化，出現了兩極分化的現象，可以說是破壞了香港社會的和諧。雖然人大常委會已表明在 07/08 年並不是進行普選的時機，但是在政制發展上留有一定的空間，而且政制發展問題並不是一朝一夕可以解決，所以在未來的日子，就著政制發展的進度、方式和細節，我們將會有很多基礎工作要做，亦都會聽到很多不同意見。

由於香港是一個國際商業大都會，所以我們希望，任何政制的的推進，必須順應香港經濟的長遠發展，令到我們將來的營商環境更加完善。香港公共財政狀況在過去三年不斷惡化。要解決這些問題，我們需要從削減政府經常性開支，和擴闊稅基兩方面入手；同時我們亦要遵循《基本法》中，有關維持低稅制和平衡預算的規定。故此，在政策發展的問題上，我們必須循序漸進，避免因為過於急進而引至經濟和社會動盪。

我們很高興能夠見到，今年年初的經濟增長，在 CEPA 的帶動下表現強勁，總商 16

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

會亦調高今年經濟增長預測至 5%； CEPA 提供一個機遇，令香港服務業與內地經濟發展結合，就好像當年本港製造業北上一樣，對香港經濟帶來了振興的作用。如果按照這個趨勢，在未來的數年，香港的經濟發展和消費信心將會逐漸鞏固。我相信，任何政界、商界或社會人士，都希望香港能夠「安定繁榮」。故此，無論政制發展的最終方案是甚麼，我們必須要確保，有關的制度，以及有關制度的發展過程，不會令經濟繁榮和社會穩定受到損害，反而更能確保香港繼續在中國，甚至國際經濟舞台上扮演更重要的角色。

要確保政制發展能夠推行得宜，我們必須注意數個重點：

化爭論為共識

首先，我們須要時刻重視北京的關注，同時在政制發展的過程中，確保各界本著尊重、團結和務實的態度行事。

我們必須要承認，在「一國」的原則下，中央政府對香港政制事務是高度關注，並且有最終的決定權；我們亦要考慮到，中央領導人在國事上的決策，顧及的層面往往超越香港問題的框架；同時，我們在「兩制」下，亦不能忽略港人對民主的訴求。要在兩者之間取得一個平衡，既要「與時並進」，又要「顧全大局」，並不是一件容易做的事，但是我們至少要做到，有關的討論是在一個良好的氣氛下進行，並且鼓勵持不同意見的人士，本著尊重和務實的態度來展開對話。

故此，總商會在過往曾向政府呈交意見書，強調耐心和徹底諮詢的重要性，著眼點應在於建立相關架構，而非某個目標日期或具體結果。事實上，要成功落實政制發展具體方案，必須要獲得立法會、行政長官及人大常委會三方同意，缺一不可，故此我們希望，港人能以彼此包容，以及尋求共同利益的態度處理這個課題。我們相信，只要我們致力將政制發展的工作推行得宜，並且得到具建設性和合理的進展，一定能夠滿足絕大部分港人的要求，並且符合中國的整體利益。

啟動政制發展

第二，在啟動政制發展的同時，我們亦要著手建立有關的基礎配套。

政制發展所涉及的問題，是非常廣泛和全面，不單是局限於「直選時間表」，或者是「選舉辦法」這些議題。我們需要考慮到，在現時的政制架構中，是否有足夠的「配套設施」？例如是，我們現行的架構能否配合發展？我們的政黨是否已 17

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

經就政制內容、經濟發展，定下明確的政綱？我們是否有足夠的政治人才和民間智囊？以及，我們如何普及公民教育，提升港人對中國近代歷史發展的認識，和增強他們的公民意識？

事實上，香港政治環境發展正在起步階段，在很多政制的基礎設施仍待改善，同時，香港社會各界就行政長官選舉和立法會產生辦法，尚未形成廣泛共識。雖然在 07 和 08 年不會進行普選，但是特首的報告，對政制發展已經提供了明確的路向，因此我們應該正面的向前看，將專注力轉為與政務司司長曾蔭權領導的專責小組合作。在目前，我們有兩項重要的工作：首先，我們要著手進行廣泛的社會諮詢，令社會各階層包括工商界，都能夠表達和反映他們的意見，以確定 07/08 年的選舉辦法應該怎樣修改，才會獲得社會各界的支持，和改善政策的制定和執行；其間，我們需要加強立法會的代表性，以及改善立法會與行政主導政府的關係。第二項重要工作，是比較長遠性的，是我們要開始為政制發展舖路，培養政治文化，令社會各階層，包括是工商界能夠參予政治，有助發展更多代表不同界別和階層的政黨。

人大常委會既已確認要修改兩個選舉方法，政制發展專責小組應該盡早展開公眾諮詢的工作。期間，我們要小心判斷哪些是「噪音」，哪些是「聲音」，以免公眾在討論的過程中，受到以偏蓋全的論點誤導。例如，在政治體制上，讓公民有更大程度的參與，不一定導致福利主義抬頭，但是若果政府不進行相關工作，如讓市民認識不履行責任和不實施更廣闊稅基的代價，福利主義便可能產生；又例如將勞工權利的要求等同全民普選，不單會嚇走可能贊同全民普選概念的工商界人士，還會把「政策」與「制度」混淆。所以我認為，現在我們要集中力量，確保政制發展程序推行得當，而不是就一些假設的結果而爭論。

促進特區管治

第三，在政制發展的過程中，我們必須要增強特區政府的管治。政制發展的目的是要令特區政府更有效地管治香港，不論將來的政制將會如何發展，特區政府是有必要提高管治威信，同時珍惜此機會，促使政府部門進行有需要的改革措施，令到以行政為主導的政府更加有效地施政；否則，將來所推行的任何政策，只會繼續淪為「四不像」。

我認為，政府的威信是建基於正確的政策和市民的認同。故此，特區政府在制政發展的工作上，必須建立有效的諮詢架構，以及相關的配套，例如是更有份量的 18

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

智囊組織、更完備的政黨。總商會支持香港邁向更成熟的政治環境，並且對我們的前景感到樂觀。

在建立「硬件」的同時，我們亦要發展「軟件」，除了要培育政治人才，我們亦要推行公民教育，提高他們對「一國兩制」和《基本法》的認識，令到市民了解到他們所擁有的權利，以及對社會的責任。因此，政府要擴闊稅基，一方面解決現時稅基狹窄所帶來結構性的財赤問題，另一方面，將市民的稅務支出與政策掛勾，促使社會各階層履行公民責任，並且令到他們更加關心政府如何去運用資源，因而選出真正能夠代表他們的政治人才，最終能夠提升政府的認受性。

總結

總括來說，我們應該本著《基本法》的原則和精神，配合政務司司長領導的專責小組，進行政制發展的基礎工作，並且將著眼點，放在一個具建設性的架構和程序上。有關工作一旦開展，可行的日期和理想的結果自然會逐步清楚顯現。期間，我們除了要致力改善特區政府與立法會關係，亦需要發展政黨制度、培育更有分量的政策智囊團、擴闊稅基、鼓勵社會各界均衡地參政，並且推展公民教育，務使市民更加認識《基本法》、「一國兩制」和公民責任。

事實上，任何政制發展的結果，都應該是在有系統的改革環境下產生，不可能孤立地形成。在政制發展過程中，我們仍要努力振興香港經濟。更重要的是，任何由此產生的結果，均須以維持香港的獨特經濟優勢和定位為依歸，兼顧社會各階層的利益。工商界對促進香港繁榮，向來貢獻良多。因此，無論政制發展的最終結果如何，工商界在香港未來經濟發展仍擔當一個重要角色。希望我們一同攜手，摒除已見，同心合力，確保複雜的政制發展程序，能夠順利推行。多謝！

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session One – “Strengthening Government Leadership” 第一節「加強政府的領導」

Problems with the Hong Kong System 香港的管治與制度問題

Mr. Allen P.F. Lee Commentator 時事評論員李鵬飛先生

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Problems with the Hong Kong System 香港的管治與制度問題

Mr. Allen P.F. Lee 李鵬飛先生演辭概要

香港目前面臨三個主要的問題。首先是它的弱勢政府—即使是主管事務的官員也是這樣說的。特首到現在已提出了七份施政報告，但是報告內的計劃很少能夠實現，而施政卻不斷有失誤 (例如教育改革、處理老人問题和八萬五房屋計劃等)。有許多原因引至這些失誤，包括特首「單人匹馬」進入政府、而他又欠缺自己的管治班子、在立法會沒有支持票、政黨又只顧自己的利益、特首的計劃無人替他推行。

在現行的特首選舉方法下，特首無需向市民負責。況且，行政會內有不少人都有興趣當下屆特首，不斷互相鬥爭，很難合作。為了減少這些猜忌和暗鬥，也讓市民有足夠時間觀察他們的表現，這些有意競選當特首的人應該立刻公開表態及展示他們的團隊和政綱。

第三個問題是公務員士氣的低落。在高官問責制下，高官與公務員之間產生了不少摩擦，問責官員又未有辦法知道公務員對行政策略的看法。最近幾年推行的改革更使公務員失去一個領頭人。有見及此，中央政府不應該單談香港的選舉制度，也要處理公務員問题。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

SUMMARY OF SPEECH Hong Kong is now facing three problems.

The first is its weak government.

This is the

consequence of the present Chief Executive entering the government “single-handedly”, without his own governing team, without any support in LegCo, with the political parties caring only about their own interest, and without anyone to implement his proposals. Secondly, ExCo members who are coveting the position of the next Chief Executive are secretly competing with each other; hence, they fail to co-operate.

To minimize such covert

fight and to afford citizens more chance to assess their teams and their political platforms, these people should immediately announce their intention. The third problem is the low morale in the civil service.

This is the result of the conflict

between the principal officials appointed under the accountability system and civil servants. In addition to the election system, therefore, the Central government should also deal with the civil service issue.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session One – “Strengthening Government Leadership” 第一節「加強政府的領導」

THE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXECUTIVE-LED GOVERNMENT – PRINCIPLES, PRACTICE AND LESSONS TO LEARN 行政主導的政府下的問責制度: 原則、實踐與溫「教」知新

Dr. Thomas K.F. Leung Co-Convenor of Hong Kong Development Forum 香港發展論壇副召集人梁國輝博士 23

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

THE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXECUTIVE-LED GOVERNMENT – PRINCIPLES, PRACTICE AND LESSONS TO LEARN 行政主導的政府下的問責制度: 原則、實踐與溫「教」知新

Dr. Thomas K.F. Leung 梁國輝博士

摘要

先進國家的管治都有數個特徵，包括多樣化的社會；傳媒對政府作為「異議者」的角色；政府要兼聽和調協社會裏的不同意見及利益；受過教育的市民盼望有份參與政府的決策和要求被公平對待。因此，需要一個有遠見的政府，而且要作出有效的管理。與先進國家政府的改革相似，香港近年也面臨一些困撓。市民覺得政府未能改進它的工作成效和它的信用。

政府在 2002 年引進的「問責制」，雖然未有離開政府一貫執行的行政組織原則，但是它創出的三層架構 (即是主要官員、常任祕書和部門署長)，帶來一個更複雜的局署架構。在此制度下，主要官員制訂的抱負和政策不但要得到最多市民的認同，還要聚集更多專業而且具有政治智慧的人士一起工作。他或她也需要各類資訊的支持，才能回應市民和團體的要求。三層架構亦會影響資訊的垂直流動。在主要官員與常任祕書和署長的工作關係、主要官員與公務員之間對實際政府管治的認知等各項都有誤差。

故此，為了改善管治制度和程序，達到「行政主導」的理想，我們要集中精力作一些主要的改革。我們要把功能作垂直和橫向合併來簡化政府的架構；清楚界定常任祕書在主要官員與署長之間的角色；小心研究從私人機構空降入政府組織的問責官員實際上怎樣運作；檢討「政務官」職系的目的、角色和發展。 24

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Accountability – Governance Philosophy for the New Society In 1999, OECD countries (comprising most of the world’s more developed countries) convened a Governance Conference to share experiences in government reform in the preceding ten years. The Conference drew the following conclusions about governance challenge in today’s developed countries: Diversity is the very nature of advanced societies, with segments of the citizenry aspiring and actively propagating different views and interests on the public policy agenda. Media in general plays an adversarial role to the government in practically all the developed countries. Many may even subscribe to the sensational for commercial purposes. Together with the pressure groups, they present a real problem to governments in its effort to shape and drive the public policy agenda. Government must listen to and reconcile these diverse views and interests. However, achieving a unified position satisfying all or most of the citizens’ aspirations has largely proven to be impossible. An educated citizenry does not necessarily expect that government meet all its demands, as their very diverse interests would make this impossible to achieve. However, they would expect to be listened to, allowed to participate and treated fairly in the process of consultation and decision-making. Therefore, an effective government in today’s advanced society must gear itself to anticipate, manage and respond to these diverse interests and forces. It must fully devote its attention and align all its capabilities (resources, organization, people) to build consensus and coalitions for its major policy thrusts. Furthermore, OECD countries found that they shared some interesting, but very important insights into the notion of ‘accountability’ - from the citizen’s point of view. Not surprisingly, they all found that ordinary citizens are generally very fuzzy about what accountability means. Important as it may be as a governance concept, there is no universally accepted definition of the term. However, ‘accountability’ has a commonly shared meaning in defining the relationship of government viz-a-viz its citizens. Essentially, citizens in OECD countries interpret accountability as an expectation that their governments are ‘transparent’ and ‘responsive’ when they conduct their business of governing. By being transparent, government decision-making process must be seen to be ‘fair’ and ‘participative’. Responsiveness is defined by the citizens as the government’s ability to ‘deliver prompt solutions to address problems’. However, ten years of public sector reform in OECD countries has taught the governments a very bitter lesson, on two major hurdles they must overcome. Firstly, all governments suffer tremendously from a fragmented and over-layered structure, which seriously hampers information flow and operation both vertically and horizontally. 25

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Simple requests or demands from citizens would often fall into a ‘black hole’ and lost in the complex organization of government departments. Government typically is organized along narrow functional lines (presumably for higher bureaucratic efficiency). This gives rise to a proliferation of departments and staff grades, which guard their respective territories jealously and often do not communicate or work well with each other. Consequently, ‘total solutions’ produced in a timely and effective manner to address citizens’ problems or demands are often non-existent. This in turn gives rise to a huge sense of frustration and even anger toward the government. Secondly, all governments suffer from an inefficient, government-centric culture (traditions, constraints). Departments often consume enormous energy in internal coordination, but not cooperating with each other to produce solutions. They are set in their own way of working and are bound by many self-imposed constraints (operating policies, rules, regulations, procedures). Incremental improvement is considered a huge step forward, when what is needed is fundamental re-thinking of priorities and how they could best serve the public. For the SAR Government, we are plagued by the same problems, particularly in the last few years. Hong Kong is an advanced society not very much different from those of OECD countries. The socio-political dynamics of our society echo the experience of OECD governments. Unfortunately, due to the need for stability before and after the 1997 handover, we have embarked on public sector reform much later than OECD countries. As expectations of the citizens rose when our society evolved and advanced, the SAR Government found itself quickly falling ‘behind the curve’ in the eyes of its citizens. Despite improvements made in the last few yesars, the government has so far failed to close the performance and credibility gap in the eyes of the citizens. The McKinsey Model and the Challenge to the Principal Official under the Accountability System To understand how the SAR Government works, we must start with the McKinsey Model introduced in the early eighties as the organization framework for the then colonial government.

Put in a concise way, the McKinsey Model expounds the principle of

separating clearly the responsibility for strategy/policy formulation from that of policy implementation, with the former being designated as the principal domain of the policy bureau (then called the policy branch) and the latter of the department. From its inception, the McKinsey Model has defined the key responsibility areas of the policy bureau to include: Defining the strategy and policies in its portfolio and soliciting input from the public through established consultation channels and process. Formalizing the policies, drafting and proposing legislation if necessary and securing funding for their implementation. Allocating

resources

and

monitoring

implementation

its

departments, to ensure achievement of intended policy outcomes. 26

subordinate

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

The department, on the other hand, is mainly responsible for: Translating policies into programmes and managing its resources (funds, staff) efficiently to achieve policy outcomes. Enforcing ordinances and delivering quality services to the public. The concept of the Accountability System introduced in 2002 by the Administration does not fundamentally negate the McKinsey Model. In fact, the key principles of the model have continued to define the organizational philosophy of the SAR Government.

However, the

creation of the 3-tier structure (Principal Official, Permanent Secretary, Head of Department) has created a more complicated bureau and departmental structure. Under the Accountability System, the Principal Official has to take a strong lead to forge a common vision and articulate a policy agenda embraced by the majority of the citizenry. Hence, it is essential to bring under one roof at the bureau level all the requisite professional and political knowledge and brainpower, to scan and analyze the full spectrum of views and interests in the vision and strategy formulation process.

The Principal Official must exercise

top-down control of this process, and make sure that he/she not only ‘do things right’, but also ‘do the right thing’. As citizens demand instant answers to their concerns, it is essential to build the capacity in the bureau and departments for instant assimilation of multiple information sources, promptly accessed and intelligently decoded. To operate effectively at the political level with external stakeholders (Legco, political parties, pressure groups, media, citizens), the Principal Official must always be promptly advised by people with the right knowledge and expertise. In today’s political environment, more than ever, government must implement its policies through expert and synchronized execution, to forge public support and earn the trust of the citizens.

Ineffectual execution derails implementation and galvanizes opposition to

government policy initiatives. A Steep Learning Curve for the New Government A More Complicated Structure Under the new structure, there are now more problems of interfacing and overlapping responsibilities in policy formulation or implementation across the three levels (Principal 27

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Official, Permanent Secretary, Head of Department).

The 3-tier structure has also created

bureaucratic barriers to information and knowledge flow vertically, which may cause delay or judgment errors at the top when gauging or responding to politically-sensitive issues. At the time of introduction of the new government structure in 2002, the Chief Executive had left the door open for the Principal Officials to review the respective organizations of their bureaux and departments, under the following guiding principles: Rationalize the roles of the bureaux and departments, to clearly separate responsibilities with regard to strategy/policy formulation and implementation. Delayer the organization to enable an efficient communication and work process, and a faster, more effective response to meet external stakeholders’ demands. Achieve higher efficiency and cost savings through re-deployment of posts and staff, and elimination of redundant posts. Efforts in this direction were subsequently pursued with a somewhat higher sense of urgency due to budgetary pressures (targeted budget reduction of 1.8% for FY2003/04 and an aggregated reduction of 11% for FY2004-08), as Principal Officials began to grapple with the challenge of delivering a higher level of performance with a smaller workforce. Given the above, it is not surprising that recent re-organization of government bureaux and departments have all focused on: Re-defining the Permanent Secretary’s role to integrate both policy formulation and implementation. Reducing double-handling of work by integrating similar functions and responsibilities between the bureau and department. Reducing hierarchical layers, particularly at the directorate level. The merging of Education and Manpower Bureau(EMB) and Education Department(ED), for instance, was underpinned by the need to create an integrated organizational vehicle to drive education reform.

It also underscored the concern that in the highly controversial and

volatile environment of educational reform, a tight bundling of strategy/policy formulation and implementation would be of paramount importance. 28

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Furthermore, the new organization also re-positioned ED, from being an ‘operational manager’ of the school system to a more strategic policy implementation role.

Accordingly,

ED was fully absorbed into EMB in early 2003, headed by the Permanent Secretary for Education and Manpower. The RIFPH (Committee on the Review of the Institutional Framework for Public Housing) report published in June, 2002 raised the issue of overlap of functions between the former Housing Bureau and Housing Department, particularly in areas of project management, research and planning, staff and office administration, and resource management.

The

problem was also acute in the grey area between the formulation of policies and the implementation of such policies. To address these problems, a completely new organization structure was put in place in July, 2002, with the a new housing organization

(still called the Housing Department) headed by

the Permanent Secretary for Housing, who also performs the role of Director of Housing. Similar to the case of Housing Bureau/Housing Department, EDLB also decided to create a post of Permanent Secretary for Economic Development and Labour (Labour)/Commissioner for Labour.

In practice, this eliminates the Head of Department post and allows the

Permanent Secretary to oversee both policy formulation as well as policy implementation. It is interesting to note that in all three cases: There is a clear-cut, unitary departmental counterpart to the Bureau or Branch – a condition likely to lead to role overlap and inefficiencies between the two. The three policy portfolios have direct and strong impact on large segments of society, with long term policy as well as day-to-day service delivery implications.

They are

all political minefields, littered with emotive issues, diverse views and entrenched vested interests. Both conditions would provide the highest benefit to integration of policy formulation and implementation, through merging the two organizations under a unitary chain of command. Role of Permanent Secretary The role of the Permanent Secretary holds the key to how the Accountability System should work in the newly designed organization. Unfortunately, this was not clearly understood right 29

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

from the start. In theory, it is supposed to play the role not unlike an ‘Under-secretary’ to the ‘Minister’, with the former overseeing the bureaucratic machinery to formulate and implement policies and the latter focusing more on policy vision and political interface with key stakeholders. However, as it turns out, one cannot always clearly separate policy vision and policy formulation.

Policy formulation must be buttressed by effective policy implementation.

Moreover, politics often begins at the grass-root level and ends up on the desk of the Principal Official. It has a distinct disdain for the hierarchical structure of the bureaucracy. Permanent Secretaries are themselves the most seasoned and politically astute of civil servants. Some have even been policy secretaries in the previous term. Under the new structure, they have an unclear role in policy formulation and a lack of executive power over the departments. Principal Officials, on the other hand, have the zest and vision, but some are complete novices in policy formulation, managing the legislative agenda and resource allocation. They are also two steps away from their own departments, whose day-to-day performance would directly affect their standing in the eyes of the public. The problem is less acute if the Principal Official comes from the previous crop of policy secretaries. However, for those coming in ‘from the cold’, that is, from the private sector, the experience has been rather traumatic. Culture Gap Principal Officials (with a private sector background) bring into their job a very different experience base and perspective.

They have very little (and none for some) practical

knowledge about the business of Government. Some even takes a rather critical view of the bureaucracy when they come into the job. In such cases, the culture clash between the Principal Official and the bureaucracy is almost immediate and visible. Generally, it is less of a problem for those policy areas with a strong professional or economic emphasis, for instance Works, Treasury, Financial Services, Trade & Commerce. However, the impact of such a value and culture gap is more apparent in policy areas with a strong socio-political content. In time, both sides have learnt to work with each other, to avoid outright conflicts. In an interesting twist, Legco in fact has given the government a ready excuse to lie low and proceed cautiously, by assuming an adversarial stance and micro-managing the Administration. This has discouraged the introduction of very progressive legislation, and thus avoided potential ideological clashes in the policy formulation process. 30

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

However, the fact remains that there are a lot of gaps in the governance process under the current Accountability System, starting from policy vision, policy formulation, implementation, to handling matters at the political level. The Principal Official is not only challenged by an adversarial Legco and media constantly, he/she is not always guaranteed the full backing of the bureaucracy to shape and drive the policy agenda. A great deal depends on how individuals are able to overcome these systemic hurdles, by managing their own biases and egos. So far, it has worked quite well for some cases and not so well for some others. Always, the underlying tension is rather palpable. Taking It Forward In some sense, the Accountability System is a governance experiment which could not reasonably be expected to work well right from the start.

To build on the experience and

truly ‘live’ the ideal of an executive-led government, we should focus our efforts on four high priority areas to improve the governance structure and process.

They include:

Simplifying the organization structure of government, by merging functions vertically and horizontally. This would mean absorbing some departments into the bureau and merging some departments.

A complicated government organization increases the need for internal

coordination, blocks information flow and hampers timely and effective response to emerging situations. The role of the Permanent Secretary viz-a-viz both the Principal Official and the Head of Department should be more clearly defined from the top.

A case-by-case approach, as is

being done now, would build into the top government structure different variations which may be difficult to reconcile in the future.

This is a daunting scenario, given the bureaucracy’s

tendency to cast in stone any changes introduced without an overall, cogent set of principles. The appointment of Principal Officials from the private sector is a laudable step forward. However, how this works in practice would need to be studied carefully.

It is almost farcical

and naïve to expect that a few ‘outsiders’ parachuted into the bureaucratic system would really make a difference to governance effectiveness. The Accountability System has raised expectations enormously, but its very design is inherently unable to deliver the results to the public. Any executive-led government must be backed by an officers corp highly tuned into the society it governs, as well as possesses the competence to discharge its responsibilities in a broad range of policy domains.

In this connection, we should review the purpose, role and 31

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

development of the Administrative Officer grade.

As the ‘ruling elite’, the positioning and

morale of the grade is a matter of great importance to future governance effectiveness.

the past few years, there has been a steady deterioration and mission drift of the AO grade. Despite the appointment of ‘outsiders’ to the Principal Official level, the fact remains that many of our future leaders in government would still be hand-picked from the AO grade. such, we would ignore the future of the AO grade at our peril.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session One – “Strengthening Government Leadership” 第一節「加強政府的領導」

UNIFIED OR DIVIDED GOVERNMENT? THE EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF HONG KONG’S EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS 『合一政府』或『分掌政府』？香港行政立法關係的演變和發展

Dr. Li Pang Kwong Associate Professor, Department of Politics and Sociology, Lingnan University, and Director of Public Governance Programme 嶺南大學政治學及社會學系副教授兼公共管治研究部主任李彭廣博士 33

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

UNIFIED OR DIVIDED GOVERNMENT? THE EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF HONG KONG’S EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS 『合一政府』或『分掌政府』？香港行政立法關係的演變和發展 Dr. Li Pang Kwong 李彭廣博士 ABSTRACT There can be two main types of power distribution, namely the “separation of powers” and the “fusion of powers”.

The former is typical of the president system, while the latter of the

parliamentary system.

Governments can be “unified” or “divided”.

Under the former, the

executive and legislative bodies are controlled by the same political party or political union; under the latter, they are controlled by different parties. In Hong Kong, the introduction of the election system has changed the nature of the political system.

Prior to 1985, the legislative body was “subordinate” to the executive, so that the

Legislative Council had to adopt the views of the government and must support the government.

Since 1995, voters have substituted the Governor to exercise the power of

appointing the legislative body, implying that the executive body can no longer rely on the appointment system to control or lead decision-making in the legislative council.

It has to

apply real politics to form pro-government parliamentary union so as to continue with smooth policy implementation.

The use or the threat to use its veto power over legislations

submitted by the Chief Executive or the executive has enabled the legislative body to exert real impact on policies. Scholars have both positive and negative opinions on the “divided government” system. Some think that it will lead to stalemate between the executive and legislative bodies, inefficiency in policy implementation and gridlock in policy making.

Others feel that it can

result in check and balance of powers, ensure unbiased policies and encourage the establishment of consensus politics. Leaders controlling executive power will have to respect the views of the opposition and learn to derive consensus.

The positive role of the opposition is to prevent the government

proposing policies or legislations unacceptable to the majority of the voters. members must play their role as “responsible politicians”. 34

The opposition

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

政治是對價值作權威性分配（authoritative allocation of values）的活動。而政治過程及附在其中的政治競爭（可簡稱政治運作）往往是由制度面的規範和行為面的個體計算的互動下進行的。制度可視作規範政治競爭的遊戲規則，而行為則是個體在現有制度的規範下所進行的極大化行動。政治競爭的結果是制度面和行為面的互動結果。制度的創新和改革反映了部分競爭者成功改變制度的內涵，進而創造另一套的制度誘因，並獎勵與之匹配的行為的出現。現實政治運作既有制度面的規範，也有行為面的影響，對香港行政立法關係的分析也由此切入吧！

何謂「合一政府」？何謂「分掌政府」？權力分立原則（separation of powers）是總統制的制度特色之一：選民透過不同的產生途徑組成行政機關和立法機關（如圖一所示），因兩者的產生方法不同而有互相監督和制衡、互不從屬和各自有一定的任期的特色。與權力分立原則相反的是權力匯集（fusion of powers），它是議會制的制度特色之一：選民選舉產生立法機關，而立法機關中擁有半數議席優勢的政黨便負責組織內閣（即行政機關），內閣是否能繼續執政則視乎立法機關的支持或信任與否而定（如圖一所示）。

圖一

議會制和總統制

內閣內閣議會

總統

議會

選民

選民議會制

總統制

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

「合一政府」（unified government）是指行政機關和立法機關是由相同政黨或政治聯盟所掌握而言，而「分掌政府」（divided government）則是指行政機關和立法機關是由兩個不同政黨或政治聯盟所分掌而言。如圖二所示，「甲甲」或「乙乙」代表政黨甲或政黨乙同時贏得行政機關的選舉和立法機關過半議席，形成「合一政府」的局面；而「甲乙」或「乙甲」則代表政黨甲或政黨乙只贏得行政機關的選舉或立法機關過半議席的其中一項，成就了「分掌政府」的政局。

在議會制的政治體系中，因為權力匯集的原因，在立法機關擁有半數的政黨或政治聯盟順理成章擁有組織內閣的權力，因此必然是「合一政府」。例如，英國工黨在下議院選舉中取得半數議席，工黨便負起組織內閣的工作和執掌行政機關的權力。

在總統制的政治體系中，因為是權力分立的原故，行政機關和立法機關可能是由相同政黨或政治聯盟所掌握，但也可能由不同政黨或政治聯盟分掌，因此是「合一政府」或是「分掌政府」要視乎每次改選後選民的集體決定而定。例如，美國的民主黨或共和黨可能同時贏得總統和參、眾兩院多數議席，形成「合一政府」的局面；又如共和黨贏得總統寶座，而民主黨取得兩院或其中一院的多數席位，又或是民主黨贏得總統寶座，而共和黨取得兩院或其中一院的多數席位，則成就了「分掌政府」的格局。美國從一九四七年（即第八十屆國會）起至今總共有二十九屆國會，當中只有十一屆是「合一政府」，其餘的十八屆是「分掌政府」。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

圖二

合一政府、分掌政府與政黨動態

立法機關甲乙

合一政府分掌政府

行政機關

分掌政府

甲甲

合一政府

乙甲

乙乙

「行政主導」的質變

隨著選舉制度的漸次引入，香港的政治體制亦隨之起了質的變化。在一九八五年之前，香港的行政立法關係可說是從屬的：立法機關的成員是由行政機關的官員兼任（當然官守或官守議員）或是由總督提名委任產生（委任非官守議員）。直至一九七五為止，立法局的半數議席都一直掌握在當然官守和官守議員（包括總督）的手中（參看表一）。

此外，立法局當然官守和官守議員在審議和表決任何議案時，必須支持政府的提案，並以政府的意見為意見；立法局的委任非官守議員則礙於委任者與被委任的從屬政治關係，而未能以自己的意見為意見。雖然立法局在憲制上擁有被動的立法權和財政預算案審批權，但由於官守議員掌握過半數議席或是非官守議員的權力從屬地位的關係，以總督為首的行政機關主導著立法機關的決定和意志。主導者，乃掌握決定權也。這種殖民地強弱懸殊和權力不對稱的（政）府（立法）局關係，有稱之為「行政主導」的政治體制。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

表一立法局的組成（1947-84）

35 30

數目

25 20 15 10 5 0 47

年份官守議員(包括總督)

委任議員

這種以委任制度為基礎的「行政主導」政治體制，突顯了立法機關的權力從屬地位。但隨著選舉制度漸次取代委任制度而成為政治權力的分配方法，行政機關亦陸續失去組成和支配立法機關的權力。在一九九五年後，立法局已經再沒有官守議員和委任議員，全部議員是經由功能團體、地方普選和選舉委員會的選舉所產生。換言之，選民已經取代總督擁有產生立法機關的權力。這意味著行政機關不能再仗著委任制度來控制或主導立法機關的意志或決定，而需改為透過現實政治的操作來組成親政府的議會聯盟，以維持其施政的暢順。由是立法機關不再在憲制上從屬於行政機關之下，並取得自主和對等的地位。

雖然立法機關的權力沒有太多轉變，但隨著產生方法的質變，原先擁有但鮮有或沒有行使的法定權力和附在其上的政治影響力便由似有還無變為具體而實質。縱使行政長官仍然擁有管治上的主動權力，但在行使這些權力時，如涉及法律的制訂或公共財政收支時，就必須取得立法機關的同意，亦即是立法機關有權否決行政長官或行政機關的任何提案。如果得不到立法會的同意，特區 38

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

政府的法案和財政預算案是無法獲得通過和執行的。自一九九七年特區政府成立至今，立法會否決權的行使或威脅行使已經對實際政治產生影響，如二零零三年的「基本法」第二十三條立法的撤回和一九九九年的路邊泊車錶加費的否決，便是很好的例子。

在今年九月立法會或其後的選舉中，如果泛民主派贏得「絕對半數」（即三十一席或以上）、「積極半數」（即三十席）或「否決半數」（即二十九席）的話，「分掌政府」便形成，特區政府便失去其議會優勢，並需在政策、議案和施政上作出全面妥協，以容納泛民主派的要求。如果泛民主派只能取得「突襲半數」（此一半數的具體數目是浮動的，視乎每次表決時出席議員的總數而定），特區政府亦不易應付和疲於奔命，理由是政府要不斷動員和確保有足夠支持有關政府議案的議員出席，又或是防止出現非民主派議員不支持政府議案的出現，否則政府的議案便會遭到否決。以上的分析只適用於政府議案，因為大部分政府議案的表決是以出席立法會議員的簡單多數作決的，不受分組點票機制約束；而議員提出的議案或議員對政府議案提修正案，則是以分組點票機制來作決定。

在行政機關有權提名委任產生立法機關的年代，總督或行政機關才可「主導」立法機關。但隨著選舉制度取代委任制度後，特區的行政長官並沒有憲制上的權力來組織立法機關，只能透過目前有利於親政府力量的制度安排或行政長官的政治能量，來建立立法會的親政府聯盟（即圖三方塊一的情況）。由於特區政府的管治能力不彰，在部分重要政策上與市民的期望有相當的落差，致使香港在「七一遊行」後所釋放的社會求變壓力，正引向「分掌政府」的方向發展（亦即由圖三的方塊一向方塊二進發），亦即是選出一個以泛民主派為多數的立法會。

中央政府在過去數月的動作是在制度面強化其防禦和提高制度的安全系數，在可見的將來朝向方塊三（目前的反對派聯盟贏得行政長官寶座和目前的政府聯盟掌握立法會的半數議席）和方塊四（目前的反對派聯盟同時贏得行政長官寶座和掌握立法會的半數議席）的發展機率不大。但在一段不短的時期內，方塊二的「分掌政府」的出現是有可能的。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

圖三

香港行政立法關係的發展立法會政政

政反

行政長官

一

二

三

四

反政

反反

政：政府聯盟反：反對派聯盟

「分掌政府」下的政治動態

學者對「分掌政府」的評價毀譽參半，有些意見認為會導致行政和立法機關的僵局、政府施政缺乏效率、政策制訂「滯塞」（gridlock）等現象。但亦有從正面功能觀之，認為可有效制衡和約束權力的運用、政策不走偏鋒、鼓勵共識政治的形成等。這些評價可作為參考，但要分析「分掌政府」的利害便需要放在具體的個案或狀態當中，才可有所論證。

「分掌政府」的出現，並不意味著政治的終結，反而是另一種政治遊戲的開始。這尤其對行政機關權力膨脹的政治體系而言，更是良性的互動發展。當反對派聯盟取得半數議席時，執掌行政機關權力的政治領袖便要學習尊重反對派的意見、嘗試尋求政策共識、提倡政治價值和文化的多元化發展。反對派掌握議會半數議席的積極意義在於有效阻止執政的政府聯盟提出不為多數選民接受的政策或法案，其有效的工具便是否決權的行使或威脅行使。當然，如果執政的政府聯盟提出選民所欲的政策或議案，反對派是不敢貿然否決的，因為他們會受制於選民的預期反應 40

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

（anticipated reaction）─— 選票的懲罰。

執政的政府聯盟領袖應理解和明白，反對派聯盟取得半數議席是得到選民的負托和祝福的，因此如何提出為選民接受的政策和議案，才是重獲選民支持的關鍵。再者，行政機關仍然掌有主動的管治權和莫大的政治和行政資源，如能善加運用，透過政策的成效來厚植政治資本，取得市民的支持和贏回下屆議會的選舉是指日可待的。

對於反對派聯盟來說，有理有節地回應政府聯盟的政策是選民的期盼，在是其是、非其非的原則下，扮演好「忠誠的反對派」角色，並展現其負責的從政態度，乃至其議政和執政的能力，則能打開廣闊的政治發展空間。

「分掌政府」下的行政和立法機關分掌於不同政治聯盟手中，政治容易形成僵局，但究其原因往往是府會互不退讓或妥協的結果。假若執政的政治聯盟或反對派聯盟是必須以選民的偏好為依歸的話，這便產生政治和選舉壓力促使府會雙方尋找新的均衡點，從而打破僵局和達成新的政治均衡狀態。

香港特區的府會關係已經不可能回到殖民地「行政主導」下那種主從關係上，那是制度變革和政治轉型所使然。只要特區政府一天未能提高其管治質素和水平，重拾市民的信心，以及行政長官和立法會選舉不進一步普及化的話，那麼「分掌政府」將會是選民樂見的，理由是反對派在議會佔多數席位才能有效制衡行政機關，以及鞭策其改善施政能力和成效。

從「行政主導」政府到「分掌政府」的可能出現，反映了香港特區的制度面和行為面因素的互動，以及尋找動態政治均衡點的發展趨勢，這亦代表了行政寡頭體制過渡至權力制衡體制的嘗試，但能否成功主要視乎擁有政治權力的中央和特區政府袞袞諸公能否為這一政治過渡創造有利條件了。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session Two – “Enhancing Government-People Relations” 第二節「強化市民與政府的關係」

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND THE GOVERNMENT: THE ROLE OF MEDIA 市民與政府的關係: 傳媒的角色

Ms. May Chan Chairman of Hong Kong News Executives’ Association 香港新聞行政人員協會主席陳淑薇女士 42

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND THE GOVERNMENT: THE ROLE OF MEDIA 市民與政府的關係: 傳媒的角色

Ms. May Chan 陳淑薇女士

ABSTRACT Facing with numerous issues and controversies, the Hong Kong SAR government has to improve its relationship with the public and cooperate with the news media in order to strengthen public dialogue and actively respond to emerging crises. We hope that the government will listen to different voices, consider opposite viewpoints, communicate with dissenters, and build mutual trust. The improvement of government’s performance to a certain extent depends on a free media, which can dutifully perform its watchdog role. In the past few years, the media’s “surrogate democracy” function has become more important, indicating that Hong Kong still enjoys freedom of speech and press freedom. Otherwise, the media would not be so influential. We should treasure this invaluable asset and uphold Hong Kong’s press freedom and speech freedom. The news media have to base their reports on facts, and reflect public views in a truthful and fair manner. The media are willing to act as a platform and a bridge to link up the government and the public. The issue is whether the government is willing to put down the bureaucratic mindset and truly listen to people’s voice as reflected in the media.

傳媒的代議功能去年 SARS 肆虐期間，醫管局當初未有全面為員工提供口罩時，醫護人員紛紛致電電台的 phone–in 節目求助訴苦。而且在近年，市民每當遇到難以解決的事或求助無門時，便會致電電台，或寫信給報章雜誌求助，希望透過傳媒來幫忙解決困難。

香港是一個開放的城市。我們有公開的立法會，有六十位立法會議員。我們有公開的法院，更有廉政公署，而政府的官員的電話和電郵也是公開的，市民有途徑聯絡政府官員及立法會議員。但為甚麼市民會選擇在遇事時尋求傳媒的協助呢？因為過往經驗證明，這是有效及快捷的途徑。市 43

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

民在尋求政府協助不得要領或投訴無門時，便會向傳媒求助，而往往透過傳媒將事件公開了，問題便容易解決。是政府在接到市民投訴或求助時因循苟且，未有即時解決問題，還是市民對政府無信心呢？市民在遇到問題時傾向找傳媒求助，多於向立法會議員求助，市民是否認為傳媒較立法會議員更能協助市民解決問題，以及傳媒較立法會議員更親民呢？

中文大學新聞與傳播學院的陳韜文教授及蘇鑰機教授，於二零零一年中進行了一項調查，在回收的七百多份問卷中，近四成接受訪問的市民認為，傳媒可為民喉舌，反映民意。而有約六成被訪者認為傳媒較立法會更能代表民意，也顯示傳媒有重要的代議功能。調查反映出市民對傳媒的代議功能有深切期望，當中對為民喉舌和進行輿論監督作用尤其重視。調查的結果也發現，當社會遇到危機，政府的表現是無能的話，政府的認受性自會降低。而當政府不是民選出來的，這種情況會更嚴重。（傳媒的代議功能，陳韜文、蘇鑰機，2002）

陳教授及蘇教授的調查也發現，雖然傳媒不能影響政策的制訂，但它們在設定社會議題方面的影響力不容忽視，甚至政府在主導社會議題方面也比不上傳媒。早上聽電台 phone–in 節目，不難發現政府往往在受到主持人批評時，官員就像救火隊疲於奔命去撲火，但結果又愈描愈黑。因而社會上有「傳媒治港」之類的說法。這些現象到底健康嗎？為甚麼會演變成這樣呢？為甚麼市民遇到困難時會找傳媒協助，而不直接找政府解決？是否因為求助也不得要領？

事實上市民大眾遇事向傳媒求助，透過傳媒向當局施壓，又能湊效。是因為傳媒監督起了作用，還是因為小市民直達官員們的渠道還是不暢通呢？如果市民直接向政府求助時，得到有效及積極回應，相信市民與政府的關係就不會演變成現時的樣子。但現實是市民的訴求很多時都得不到即時回應，轉而透過傳媒申訴，傳媒大力動員追究，或能得以處理，結果是市民信賴傳媒多於政府，傳媒在此扮演了市民與政府間的橋樑角色，其代議地位也因而鞏固，但政府在市民心中的地位便相應下降。

是傳媒打擊了政府的威信嗎? 中央政府和特區政府近日都不時強調社會團結的重要性，也有個別人士認為傳媒對政府的批評分化社會，打擊政府威信，社會各界要以大局為重，不要只顧批評。有人更批評傳媒很多時斷章取義，好像在一些早上電台節目，主持人就被指不弄清是非黑白就胡亂批評，又不給予當事人空間解釋。我不排除有些節目主持人有時言論可能過激，但聽眾是懂得分辨的，當主持人表現過份時, 聽眾也會批評他們。去年 SARS 期間發生的鄭經翰與高永文事件，主持人不是受到很多市民批評嗎？

所以如果一個政府有很強的認受性、有能力、有信心、有領導才能及受市民愛戴，難道就輕易因為傳媒的批評而威信盡失？歸根究底，政府的施政如能貼近民心，高官如能走進社群，了解草根 44

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

生活，真正做到急市民所急，想市民所想，即使傳媒斷章取義、過分批評，其實還是不能打擊良好領導的公信力。

事實上，陳韜文及蘇鑰機兩位教授的調查也顯示，有 57%受訪者認為傳媒在批評政府時應該體諒政府的困難，顯示市民也不是認為傳媒要不顧一切地批評，而是要有所體諒。換言之，市民一旦知道政府的具體困難，他們也會寬容些。（傳媒的代議功能，陳韜文、蘇鑰機，2002）

我們可以看到市民還是比較體諒政府的，問題是政府到底有沒有把握機會，向市民解釋，有沒有以傳媒作平台與市民溝通？傳媒很多時在找政府回應問題時，政府往往不能第一時間回應，事件擱置下來，轉眼已經過時了。市民有投訴或訴求，政府卻未能即時透過傳媒作回應，在公共領域與民意進行認真的互動與對話，這樣是誰的錯？是處理危機能力不足，還是長官心態呢？這樣的回應能力又豈能不損害公信力呢？

市民、政府與傳媒的互信有多少？今日我們見到社會上官民之間的互信下降，市民對政府不信任，市民在提出訴求時，希望傳媒在場見證。四月二日政府總部發生學生示威抗議人大釋法，結果演變成警方清場，警方被指過分使用暴力，記者指責警方妨礙新聞採訪自由，又用暴力驅趕記者。更有質疑警方清場時，先驅趕記者是不想清場情況被報道拍攝。先不論事發當日警方行動是否有理，但事件已令警方在市民心目中的形象受損。隨後兩日，西區一名李姓警司在處理四五行動成員到中聯辦抗議時，阻止有線電視一名員工拍攝，指有線職員不是持記者證，只是持公司職員證，不能在公眾地方拍攝，否則會侵犯私隱。看到這個警司的表現，真替李處長擔心，如此質素又可當上警司。但這些中層管理人員經常會接觸市民及記者，有這樣的警司，警方公信力能不受損嗎？接連發生的事件，怎不使傳媒懷疑警方對傳媒的政策有變，想干預新聞採訪自由？

這些事情的一再發生，結果令到傳媒與警方的互信降低，市民懷疑警方行動背後動機，結果影響市民、政府及傳媒的關係，也影響政府的管治。當我們再翻閱特區政府過去一些事件時，便不難發現市民對政府的信任，過去幾年不斷下降，相信原因是與政府的施政及在出現問題時的處理手法有關，例如梁錦松買車事件、二十三條立法的處理等。當時政府如果能及早放下身段，回應市民訴求，往後的結果可能不一樣。事件中，傳媒也曾不斷向政府反映民意及提出意見，但當時政府有沒有聽進去呢？其實無論是市民或傳媒，就算是提出不同意見，也不見得單為反對而反對，因為市民大眾及傳媒人士都是愛香港這個地方的！政府要加強管治，相信要先從加強與市民及傳媒間的互信著手。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

前車可鑑：政府如何與傳媒合作及加強管治作為政府，當然希望民望高企，可惜過去幾年，政府民望徘徊低谷，市民對政府的不滿，從多次大型遊行中表露無遺。政府中人有人歸咎傳媒每日「斷章取義」「唱衰」政府，也有批評政府撥款的電台也不放過政府，結果令市民更不滿政府。但深究原因，政府民望下降，單單因為傳媒沒有幫腔和傳媒「唱衰」政府嗎？如果傳媒所言不是市民所想，不是市民心聲，這些傳媒又怎能這麼受歡迎呢？想必是傳媒某程度上也是反映市民的心聲及意見。如果政府檢討過去幾年與傳媒及市民的關係，也不難找到答案。

以下問題，大家可深思，而政府也可三思。 1.

政府有沒有強化透過傳媒以及其他渠道收集民意？

政府有沒有吸納民意，從而改善施政？

政府有沒有透過公共領域與民意進行認真互動的對話？

政府有沒有真誠主動與傳媒交心，抑或只是單向對傳媒講述政府理念、硬銷「政策」？而傳媒與政府討論政策時提出的意見，政府又採納了多少？

政府有沒有主動走進社會各階層（特別是中、下層小市民）吸納民意，了解他們的生活實況，從而研究施政是否深得民心？高官們有沒有經常親身到街頭巷尾的小茶餐廳、街市、店舖走動購物，或是乘坐公車、的士與市民交談，真正了解他們的生活和所思所想？

特首、各位司局級官員每天有否親身收聽、收看電台電視新聞及節目？每天有沒有親自閱讀原裝正版各大報章，包括社論和評論版？

總結前車可鑑，我們經歷了二十三條的立法、SARS 事件及現在的政制改革，到底政府的施政是否貼近民心，相信每個人心目中都有自己的答案。今日我們面對政治體制的爭拗，政府如何改善與市民的關係，如何與傳媒合作，透過傳媒加強與公眾對話，主動出擊，就市民關注的問題及社會顯現的危機作出積極回應，恐怕還是政府要主動解決。單是空口呼籲市民不要將時間花在硬碰和敵對，要求不同意見的人士坐下進行對話，互相尊重，冷靜理性，求同存異，同心協力，拼除成見，放下爭拗，恐怕不能解決問題。因為互相尊重是要相對的，官員若只期望市民作順民，而不從民間角度出發，或不了解民意民情，而只按照長官意志施政，問題是沒有解決的。

為政者更不要期望傳媒在大是大非的問題上，只站在政府的一邊，因為只有真理才能站得著腳。雖然我們聽過有官員說，任何一個負責任的政府在作出重大決定時，都不會也不應完全聽從民意訴求，但當我們標榜這是一個人民的政府，執政為民、以民為本時，我們的政府又豈能不聽民意、高高在上呢？我們或會同意民意不是唯一判斷這個社會真正長遠利益的標準，因為民意調查的方 46

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

法會左右調查結果。我們或也同意不同的傳媒有時也會嘩眾取寵，斷章取義，所以傳媒人也應作檢討。但一個沒有深入了解市民意願、也沒有兼聽的政府，肯定是一個不負責任的政府，也是無所作為及難以為繼的。

期望政府多聽不同的聲音，多看意見相左的觀點，多與異見人士溝通，加強相互的信任，忠言雖逆耳，但要慎防危機顯現時，已為時太晚。相信傳媒也必定願意肩負擔任平台，作為加強政府與市民間橋樑的角色，問題是我們的政府是否先願意放下官員心態，真心聆聽市民的意見和心聲。

話雖如此，但反觀過去數年，傳媒的代議功能日益重要，顯示香港享有言論及新聞自由，否則傳媒便不能充分發揮影響力。願各界人士珍惜這個令香港較其他地區更可貴及成功的重要因素，繼續努力維護香港的新聞言論自由。政府的進步，有賴自由的媒體。自由的言論可加強對政府的監督，有助保障政府的進步，改善人民生活。政府如果想控制言論新聞自由，只希望傳媒作為政府的傳聲筒，為政府說好話，只會制造社會不安和動盪，使政府的公信力受損，削弱管治能力。當國家不斷提倡加強輿論監督的同時，希望特區政府也會努力做好，主動要求監督。而傳媒也要實事求是，以事實為根據，如實反映公眾意見，公正持平。願與各位共勉，共同努力，為我們的家—— 香港做一點實事。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session Two – “Enhancing Government-People Relations” 第二節「強化市民與政府的關係」

MERITOCRACY – THE KEY TO A SUCCESSFUL CONSULTATIVE SYSTEM 用人唯才 ─ 諮詢制度的成功要訣

Ms. Audrey Eu Senior Counsel and Legislative Council Member 資深大律師與立法會議員余若薇女士

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

MERITOCRACY – THE KEY TO A SUCCESSFUL CONSULTATIVE SYSTEM 用人唯才 ─ 諮詢制度的成功要訣

Ms. Audrey Eu 余若薇女士

ABSTRACT The consultative system has long been described as one of the most successful tools in the colonial administration. Through various advisory and statutory bodies, the colonial government co-opted the elite in society, who were outstanding and influential people in their sectors. Their opinions were absorbed and included in the formulation of relevant policies, so as to minimise conflicts and dissenting voices. Unfortunately, things changed drastically after the handover. Under Mr Tung Chee Hwa's administration, public opinion, however it is expressed, no longer played an important part in the decision-making process. As one of the renowned scholar in politics, Dr Kuan Hsin Chi said in a radio interview, “Apart from the academic sector, many professional bodies feel that the present government pay less regard to their opinions, when compared to the colonial one.” In the light of incomplete democracy in Hong Kong, the over-500 advisory and consultation bodies play an important part in absorbing public opinion. Mr Tung has to change his mindset, stop using these appointments as rewards for political allegiance and return to a system based on merit.

主持女士、各位講者、嘉賓、先生、女士： 4 月 26 日，人大常委會通過決定，正式封上 07 、08 年普選大門。不過，香港人在感到失望、沮喪之餘，亦要繼續思考政治體制有何出路，如何加強政府的問責性，以及修補政府與市民日益疏離的關係。在這個背景之下，今天的研討會富有特別的意義。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

在過去數月的政制爭拗中，我們經常聽到中央官員一番耳熟能詳的說話，就是回歸後的香港比殖民地時代更民主。例如外交部長李肇星早前便說：「當年在英國人統治下，香港人沒有民主」；連國務院總理溫家寶亦強調：「港人在回歸後所享有的民主權利及各種各樣的自由是前所未有的。」言下之意，是既然香港政制已比從前民主，為何港人仍然感到不滿意？北京當局或許感到奇怪，為何殖民地時代由英女皇委任的總督，較由港人推選出來的行政長官更受歡迎？(雖然只是小圈子選舉！)為何行政長官董建華民望長期低落？為何在英國人治下港英政府可以實踐行主政主導？董建華政府卻淪為跛腳鴨？

要解答上述一連串問題，我們首先要看看英國人管治香港的策略。國務院港澳辦副主任徐澤上月訪港時曾經說過：「英國人管治香港，代香港人出主意，香港官員只負責執行，行政主導因此行之有效。」徐澤的說話說對了一半。殖民地政府之所以實現有效管治，除了有英國人作為軍師，更重要的，是一套完善的諮詢制度，令到政府在制定各項政策時，吸納社會精英的意見，減少政策帶來的影響或震盪。著名社會學家，現任中文大學校長金耀基將港英管治手法形容為「行政吸納政治」 (the administrative absorption politics)(見金耀基著：《中國政治與文化》)，即政府將社會中的精英吸納進入政府決策的機制裡面，而這些被吸納的精英，往往是所屬界別的頂尖人才，他們的意見具有一定代表性，在界別內亦有影響力。據金耀基教授指出，所謂「行政吸納政治」可分為「形式的」和「非形式的」：前者是指委任一些精英領袖進入決策組織，例如行政局、立法局或市政局等。然而由於議會位置有限，因此政府早在二次大戰以前已建立一個廣泛的諮詢網絡。到 80 年代初期，港英政府已設有超過 320 諮詢委員會。政府制訂任何政策，可以先在委員會內討論，醞釀，吸納委員意見，令政策近貼近民情。

此外，政府在 80 年初開展區議會選舉，在社區事務引入基層聲音。作為地區事務的諮詢架構，區議會在吸納民意、疏導民怨亦起到一定的作用。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

套用著名評論家林行止的說法，殖民地年代推行的精英諮詢制，由不同界別的代表性人物，形成提供意見的網絡，輔助行政主導的順利推行，在這個體制下，香港的發展，大體是人民生活一天比一天好，社會風氣一天比一天進步。(見《信報》2002 年 4 月 26 日)

當然，諮詢制度最終能否取得成效，關鍵在於政府是否用人唯才，以及真心聽取諮詢對象的意見。在這方面，港英政府大致上是成功的。然而，回歸之後形勢逆轉，諮詢架構逐漸淪為政治花瓶。

曾擔任中央政策組轄下社會凝聚力小組召集人，中大政治及行政學系系主任關信基教授在年前一篇訪問中便曾說過：「不只學界，近年有很多專業團體都覺得政府比以前不尊重他們的聲音，甚至在諮詢委員會工作的人都覺得被冷落了，諮詢少了，若從特區政府的角度出發，他覺得在回歸之後推行的改革方案和政策都正確，所以便少了接受別人的意見。」(見《信報》2002 年 10 月 21 日)

香港尚未有全面民主，政治體制存在缺陷，諮詢架構在收集及吸納民意方面，仍然有一定作用。好可惜，自董建華政府上場後，民意不再是政府制訂政策的主要考慮。有很多政策：遠的有 8 萬 5 房屋政策、恢復區議會委任制、取消兩個臨時市政局與數碼港；中期的有問責制與 23 條立法；較近期的有西九龍文娛藝術區發展、維港填海與政制發展。我們看到政府往往閉門造車，跟著便不顧一切反對聲音強力執行。至於諮詢工作已變成例行公事，甚至刻意突出支持政府的聲音。最明顯的例子莫如 23 條立法，政府諮詢手法極為偏頗，企圖製造多數市民支持《國安草案》的假象。若不是 50 萬市民上街，再加上自由黨臨陣倒戈，後果不堪設想。董建華在其第二屆就職演辭中承諾：「我們會重新檢討和改革現時 400 多個諮詢組織，使它們真正凝聚到政、商、學、基層等各界別的意見」，以加強落實問責制。好可惜，至今檢討結果只是隔靴搔癢 ─ 僅重申要增加諮詢委員會的女性比例；盡可能落實每人只可擔任 6 個委員會、以及委員任期不能超過 6 年等規定。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

政府在諮詢文件特別強調，要精簡現時諮詢組織架構，刪減不必要的組織，以及削減現時部分組織享有的法定權力，確保由主要官員負責政府決策。(見民政事務局《公營架構內的諮詢及法定組織 ─ 角色及職能檢討》諮詢文件)。由此可見，整個法定及諮詢組織檢討的目的，只是收權及節省開支。至於一些更關鍵的問題，例如委任過程如何做到公開、公平與唯才是用、以及如何更有效吸納委員的意見，卻完全被忽略了。

根據政府去年底提供的數據，在 800 名特首選舉委員會成員中，有近半數，即 390 人出任諮詢或法定組織的成員，雖然我們不能，亦不應該一口咬定這是特首對支持者的回饋，但亦難脫瓜田李下之嫌。另外，據另一項由民主動力、前線與香港民主促進會聯手進行的研究調查，有 17 名選委會成員同時身兼 6 個以上的諮詢及法定組織成員，顯示選委會委員備受器重。(見民主動力副召集人張超雄：《政府諮詢及法定組織的角色及職能檢討》，2003 年 10 月)

諮詢機構成員一身兼多職的情況是值得注視的。根據政府提供的資料，目前約 5500 擔任諮詢及法定組織成員當中，有 45 人擔任多過 6 個委員會成員，當中更有 4 人擔任 10 個或以上委員會成員。表面看來，這數字並不嚴重，問題是，現時每人最多可擔任 6 個委員會的規定明顯不夠嚴謹。試想想，這些委員會成員大部分都是大忙人，若要求他們真的抽時間、認真參與委員會事務，而不是只是開開會，當作社交聯誼，則「6 個委員會」的規定肯定要檢討。

民政事務局局長何志平去年底在立法會答覆議員質詢時強調，政府委任諮詢及法定組織主席和成員的基本政策是用人唯才，在作出任命時，主要考慮的是候選人的專長、經驗與操守等等。然而實際情況卻是另一回事。像早前發生的王見秋事件，便是最明顯的例子。就連何局長自己在立法會也承認，注意到政府較少委任民主派或民主黨成員進入諮詢或法定組織(見 2003 年 12 月 3 日《立法會會議過程正式紀錄》)，而不能否認的是，民主派在香港始終是一股主流的政治力量。總而言之，回歸後諮詢及法定組織已由政府的政策顧問，變成效忠中央及特區政府的政治獎賞工具，

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

有關具體的改革建議，除了剛才提及，要減少每人可擔任委員會的數目；早前前布政司鍾逸傑爵士提議重整諮詢架構，由政策局局長擔任相關諮詢委員會主席，並委任立法會各事務委員會主席進入相關諮詢組織，肯定可以加強諮詢組織與行政機關與立法會的聯繫，將委員意見帶進政府與立法會(見《南華早報》2004 年 4 月 14 日)。此外，民主動力建議效法英國及加拿大等國家，就委任法定與諮詢成員訂立清晰的準則，以及定期評核委員的表現，亦是值得考慮的。

主持女士，回歸後香港政治生態已變，民主大門一開放，是不可能再走回頭路。「七一」50 萬人大遊行，最關鍵的不是人數，而是遊行人士的質素：我們見到大學教授、上市公司主席、各界專業人士與文化界人士等紛紛上街。最近的保護維港行動，連退休大法官李福善也參與遊行，大聲疾呼，希望政府回頭是岸。難道這些受過高等教育的人士，都是那麼容易受人誤導？都是「反中亂港」？又或者吃飽飯沒事做？

請大家看看那些所謂「中央代言人」，包括人大、政協與其他跟中方友好的人士。這些被中方諮詢的對象，是否能代表多數港人？工聯會最近訪京，副理事長譚耀宗引述國家副主席曾慶紅的說話，怕香港出現當年文革「打倒這人、打倒那人」的亂局，因此社會穩定是最重要的。我不知道曾副主席為何說這番話，眼前的事實是：香港人每次上街都是和平及有秩序的，對經濟、民生沒有影響，反而讓國際社會看到港人堅決捍衛民主、自由的決心。即使 9 月立法會選舉，民主派取得過半議席，香港亦絕對不會失控，民主派更不會要脅政府，影響民生。

在早前的一個研討會上，前行政長官特別顧問葉國華先生說，他低估了中央與特區之間的文化落差，這正正是香港的悲劇。香港的確是中國的一部分，但在價值觀，特別是對法治、人權及自由的執著與期望，兩地還有一大截差距。故此，殖民地年代的諮詢架構可以吸納一些為社會認同的精英，中央及特區政府卻以政治掛帥，所諮詢對象與廣大市民脫節。結果呢？連精英也上街去了！

謹此陳辭，多謝各位。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session Two – “Enhancing Government-People Relations” 第二節「強化市民與政府的關係」

THE THIRD SECTOR: ENHANCING GOVERNMENT-PEOPLE INTERACTIONS 民間團體：政府與市民互動的中介者

Ms. Christine Fang Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Council of Social Service 香港社會服務聯會行政總裁方敏生女士

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

THE THIRD SECTOR: ENHANCING GOVERNMENT-PEOPLE INTERACTIONS 民間團體：政府與市民互動的中介者

Ms. Christine Fang 方敏生女士 ABSTRACT The important contribution of the “third sector” is now recognized by international organizations, including the UN. types of social services.

This sector has existed for a long time, offering many

With the recent filtering down of power from the government to the

community and the “market” for such purposes as the reduction in public expenditure, achieving “small government” and meeting the demand from the expanding middle-class for participatory democracy, the distribution of power between the government and people has been modified.

The worsening unemployment situation due to globalization has increased

the significance of the third sector and its influence has been extended through greater ability to possess information by such means as the “internet”. In providing social services and through contacts with the community, this sector understands better the needs of society members and hence can speak on their behalf. It can be a bridge between the government and the people.

The development of the third sector in Hong Kong is closely related to the territory’s community, economic and political development.

Services offered by this sector include

those in the fields of education, medical care, housing, culture, sports, social welfare and environmental protection. New influential community organizations and civil action groups have recently appeared, with greater mobilization ability and influence than traditional civil bodies. The third sector, nevertheless, has to face resistance against its future development.

One of

these obstructions is the reluctance of the government to enter into partnership with this sector. Their relationship is continuously changing, making it difficult for individual bodies in the sector to follow.

An accord between these two sectors is therefore needed.

and communication between various third sector organizations are also lacking. idea of establishing a “community foundation” should be supported. 55

Co-operation The recent

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

世界趨勢民間團體、非政府機構、第三部門、公民社會等名詞都是用來形容一些非政府、非商業、非盈利的團體，其中「非政府機構」較多用以形容提供各種社會服務的團體，「第三部門」是香港政府近年採用的名詞，而「公民社會」除了包括非政府、非盈利團體外，亦包括其它由公民自發組織的活動或行動。國際社會對這些名詞未有完全共通的定義或用法，我亦不打算在此分析，但我想指出，在過去一、二十年國際社會對民間團體的研究、對他們角色及功能的肯定是不斷增加。

經濟合作發展組織 (OECD) 一向致力協助其成員國進行政策研究及數據分析，亦認同公民社會對於制訂公共政策的貢獻i；世界銀行則指出公民社會的增長是近年世界發展中最顯著的趨勢，世銀並與公民社會組織聯合成立一個工作小組，以發展相互溝通及參與的有效渠道ii；聯合國秘書長在去年中成立一個知名人士委員會 (Secretary General’s Panel of Eminent Persons on Civil Society and UN relationships)，研究如何加強聯合國及公民社會的聯繫iii。

發展因素國際社會這麼重視民間團體，可能令你們聯想到近年一些大規模反全球化的社會運動，但這些只是全球公民社會的一小部分。其實民間團體的歷史十分悠久，民間團體提供各種社會服務的角色，例如醫療、教育、扶貧、養老，已經深入民心，但在過去十多年，民間團體在倡議全球經濟、社會、政治發展，以致環境保護及可持續發展均扮演重要及積極的角色。

有人形容過去十多年出現權力轉移的情況，政府的部分權力不斷轉移到社會，改變政府與民間團體的權力分布。其中主要原因包括：

「小政府、大社會」 – 促使政府減低開支，將政府功能轉移到市場，或將政府提供服務的角色轉移至民間團體。而民間團體作為社會服務的提供者，效果及效率亦往往超越政府。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

權力下放 – 由上而下、中央集權的政治手法缺乏成效，越來越多人要求政府將權力下放。而中產階層擴大，亦使傳統的代議政制，漸漸轉而要求參與式民主，中產階層更有能力亦更要求直接參與政府決策過程。管治新思維 – 社會要求政府提高透明度及問責性，開放資訊，及廣泛提供社會參與制訂政策的渠道。全球化 – 全球化削弱了政府主導經濟、維持市民經濟保障的角色，令失業及貧窮問題惡化，亦加強了民間團體的角色及重要性。另一方面，資訊科技及互聯網的發展，亦令民間團體更易掌握知識及資訊，加強國際聯繫，建立國際公民社會網絡，進一步提升民間團體的影響力。1992 年地球高峰會促成國際民間團體的網絡，推動國際議程，幾年前國際社會反對藥物生產商壟斷市場，協助貧國獲得較能負擔的藥物，都可反映國際公民社會的潛力。

民間團體提供社會服務，與基層社會緊密接觸，清楚了解基層需要，亦成為了普羅大眾的代言人、政策倡導者。民間團體一方面向市民提供服務，一方面向政府反映市民意見，亦成為政府與市民之間的橋樑。

社會發展亦促使更多不同種類的民間團體的發展。這些由市民自發組成的組織，成員往往有共同興趣及價值理念，透過結社發展個人興趣之餘，亦推動實踐其他的社會目標。例如：圍棋會推廣棋藝、法律學會推廣法治精神等。

由人民自發組成的民間團體，提供更直接、更親密的參與機會，有助於建立共識，亦較容易打破階級矛盾。這些團體亦較多採納一種民主、開放、參與式的管治模式，自然亦為參加者提供實踐公民教育的園地。這些組織的非牟利性質令它們較易取得社會信任，它們的價值信念亦令它們有更高的道德權威。在講求社會參與的氣氛下，民間團體亦間接成為市民參與社會的渠道。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

香港的民間團體香港民間團體的發展歷程，亦跟香港的社會、經濟及政治發展息息相關。在半個世紀前，教會、同鄉會及其他民間團體負起提供義務教育、贈醫施藥、扶貧救濟的角色。隨著社會及經濟發展，政府亦逐漸負起教育、醫療、房屋及社會福利的責任，並且透過較有規模及專業化的非政府機構提供這些服務，同鄉會及街坊會的角色逐漸式微。社會繁榮進步亦推動更多文化、體育環保團體的誕生，除了為有負擔能力的市民提供訓練及活動外，亦透過政府資助推廣這些活動。

由於公共房屋是重要的社會資源，在過去二、三十年出現不少爭取公屋資源的居民團體，但由於香港人口搬遷頻密，這些團體的規模及持久力不算特別強。同樣，香港的工會組織亦相對較為弱勢，這可能與香港人口流動、工人缺乏保障、以及以中小企業為主的經濟有關。

在眾多民間團體之中，社會福利界可算是比較有組織及有規模的界別，這與政府在過去幾十年都是透過社會福利界提供服務有關，而社聯在五十多年前開始提供一個團體交流、合作、與政府協商的平台，亦促使這個網絡的發展及穩固。

近年，香港社會亦出現許多有影響的民間團體或公民行動。它們的動員力及影響力比傳統的社會福利機構還要大，例如：幾年前的保衛塱原事件，以及這兩年的保護維港行動。這些公民行動可以有效地動員市民對某些事物或價值的執著，引發市民的熱情參與，將市民的聲音及素求表達給執政者，但比較偏重於短期、一次式的行動，暫時未有很穩定及持久的網絡。

未來發展世界各地都肯定民間團體作為政府與市民之間的橋樑，推動社會發展及促進政府有效管治的角色。但民間團體在香港的發展卻面對很大的阻力。

政府似乎一直都不大願意與民間團體建立互動、互信的伙伴關係，政府對民間團體缺乏認識，沒

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

有能力亦沒有信心與民間團體合作，結果政府往往利用自己的無上權威築起城牆，利用自己的財力去影響甚至控制民間團體。國際社會所見的權力轉移，在香港並不明顯。社聯在 2002 年舉行多次聚焦小組，回顧特區頭五年的社會發展，便有不少民間團體指出特區政府與民間團體的關係及互信有倒退的跡象。政府不重視民間團體，低估它們的動員力及影響力，最後亦影響政府本身的管治能力及公信力。政府與民間團體的關係在不同時間、不同政策範疇都不斷改變，令民間團體感到難以適從。我建議政府效法其他國家或國際社會，與民間團體訂立推動伙伴合作的社會契約。加拿大在 2001 年底便與民間組織訂立一份名為『Accord』的協約，說明政府與民間團體的角色及責任；英國則早於 1998 年訂立相類似的協約，更已先後制訂五份更具體細緻的指引，包括：政策諮詢、財政資源、義務工作、社區團體及少類族裔的團體。

香港民間團體本身的發展亦面對更多困難。雖然香港經濟相當發達，但市民參與民間團體的比率仍然偏低，而市民及商界對民間團體的支持亦不多。香港不同界別之間的民間團體的合作及溝通亦不多，未能合作推動社會發展；近年資源缺乏，亦迫使團體努力建立獨特形象、增加社會知名度，間接影響團體間的合作，亦間接使有關工作缺乏成本效益。另外，香港民間團體與國際公民社會的聯繫較弱，一方面因為國際社會對香港的認識不多，九七後更容易將香港看成中國的一部份，另一方面，香港的民間團體數量有限，亦較難全面參與國際事務。最近有一些有心人籌備成立一個社會基金(community foundation)，目的就是推動民間團體的發展、民間團體的基礎建設及合作網絡，促進社會對民間團體的認識及支持。我十分支持這個構思，我亦相信，隨著這幾年市民參與社會的意識提高，民間團體的發展空間亦會不斷擴大。

參看 http://www.oecd.org/document/22/0,2340,en_2649_201185_3207894_1_1_1_1,00.html

參看

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/CSO/0,,pagePK:220469~theSitePK:228717, 00.html iii

參看 http://www.un.org/reform/panel.htm

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Session Two – “Enhancing Government-People Relations” 第二節「強化市民與政府的關係」

THE PRINCIPAL OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM AND CIVIL SERVICE REFORM 高官問責制和公務員制度改革

Dr. Zhou Bajun Senior Research Fellow of China Everbright Holdings Company Limited 中國光大集團有限公司高級研究員周八駿博士 60

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

THE PRINCIPAL OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM AND CIVIL SERVICE REFORM 高官問責制和公務員制度改革

Dr. Zhou Bajun 周八駿博士

ABSTRACT It is necessary to introduce the Principal Officials Accountability System into HKSAR government even its initial performance obviously fell short of many people’s expectation. The shortcomings laid mainly on the lack of common political concepts and experiences of the top government team and poor policy researches. As a measure of the civil service reforming, the initial stage of the Principal Officials Accountability System is a compromise. More than half of the Principal Officials under the Accountability System were ex-civil servants while several other principal officials who must be appointed by the central government are not under the very system. When HKSAR moving on, the Principal Officials Accountability System should be improving itself. For establishing common political concepts within the top government team, there is a need to reach as soon as possible the comprehensive and accurate understanding of One-Country-Two- System principle. For much better performance of the governance, there is a need to strengthen as soon as possible policy researches. For much better responding to public opinions, there is a need to keep as soon as possible closer contacts with media and all walks of the society as well.

一性質和特點

根據行政長官董建華先生在 2002 年 4 月 17 日向立法會的介紹，高官問責制是改革香港特別行政區行政體制，同時，有限度地涉及香港特別行政區政治體制其他方面的改革。

香港特別行區行政體制是政治體制的組成部分，是關於行政長官與特區政府的關係以及特區政府的架構，後者的主體是公務員制度。

高官問責制對港英留下來的行政體制的改革表現在：（1）廢除政府最高層官員（即 3 位司長）和政策局局長由公務員出任的傳統，改為合約方式聘用問責制主要官員，（2）重組政府架構，政務司司長、財政司司長、律政司司長等與 11 位政策局局長一樣直屬行政長官。 61

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

同時，吸收立法會兩大政黨——民建聯和自由党的領袖人物進入行政會議，較之第一屆政府時行政會議成員不能保留政黨領導職務，不免令人產生香港政治制度可能朝著政黨執政方向演變的遐想。然而，這是有限度地變動特區政治體制中行政機關與立法機關之間關係。所謂“執政聯盟” 並非政黨執政的雛型。第一，凡是被委任為問責制主要官員的政黨成員，仍然被要求退出政黨；第二，進入行政會議的自由黨、民建聯領袖人物被允許保留政黨領袖職務，但特區政府發表他們的簡略卻有意忽略其政黨背景。

特區第二屆政府是高官問責制的最初實踐，具體安排有妥協或折衷色彩。一是問責制限於特區政府最高層和政策局局長，而且未包括所有按照《基本法》必須由中央政府任命的主要官員。二是 3 司 11 局首長一半以上是由曾任特區第一屆政府主要官員的高級公務員出任，誠然，除公務員事務局局長外其他都必須脫離公務員制度。三是增設政策局常任秘書長職位來安排其他曾任第一屆政府決策局局長的高級公務員，他們的待遇照舊。

二目的和效果

董建華先生在 2002 年 4 月 17 日向立法會表示：“我們所以要推行‘問責制’，是要使到特區政府的主要官員，能夠為他們的施政承擔起責任；使到特區政府的領導層理念一致，方向明確；民情在心，民意在握，同廣大市民、立法會、社會各界團體有密切的聯繫和溝通；使到施政的優先次序更明確，政策更加全面協調，為市民和社會提供更優質的服務。”

根據高官問責制的設計和行政長官的申明，高官問責制的目的可歸納為以下兩面：（一）加強行政主導體制改變第一屆政府中政務司司長、財政司司長與有關政策局局長的上下級關係為平行關係，以加強行政長官對執政班子的控制。

改變第一屆政府時只有少數主要官員進入行政會議而且非官方成員占行政會議較大比例的架構，所有問責制主要官員不但都成為行政會議成員，而且占行政會議主要比例，以確保行政長官主持下行政會議成為特區最終決策機構。問責制主要官員必須就主管政策範疇向行政長官負責。行政長官可以委任也可以解除問責制主要官員的職務，即：擁有適時和及時重組執政班子的相機權。 62

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

（二）提高管治和施政水平行政長官可以組建理念一致、施政方向明確的執政班子。問責制主要官員承擔決定和執行政策的政治責任。執政班子充分及時反映民意。政策全面協調，提供優質公共服務。

然而，近兩年來的實踐顯示，高官問責制未能收到預期效果。

三問題何在？

（一）遭受強大抵制和反對一是來自公務員隊的阻力和反對。儘管對公務員制度的改革是局部而妥協的，但公務員的反響仍然很大。二是來自立法會的阻力和反對。儘管所謂“執政聯盟”不是政黨執政的雛型，但被排除於執政聯盟的政黨或政團視自己為在野派而堅定地站到執政班子的對立面。三是來自社會的阻力和反對。儘管高官問責制所體現的制度改革只是一小步，但是傳統勢力敏感地視之為香港傳統政治體制開始大變革的信號。這一切使高官問責制自妊娠時起就遇到強大抵制和反對。

（二）缺乏共同理念和政治經驗 “一國兩制”、“港人治港”、高度自治沒有成功先例可供借鑒。對於“如何處理香港與內地經濟一體化同兩地政治制度差異之間矛盾？如何把握本地經濟轉型與政治轉變之間關係？如何拓展與內地經濟一體化同時保持對外高度開放？”等等一系列重大問題，香港缺乏理論探索。無論公務員還是社會精英，普遍缺乏政治經驗包括制定公共政策的經驗。全社會的共同缺失，必然反映到高官問責制的最初實踐上來。

（三）環境不利，任務艱巨，改革和調整過急高官問責制開始實施時香港經濟轉型已陷入困境，緊接著問責制主要官員又承擔備受爭議的《基本法》第二十三條立法工作。

特區政府同時推出其他改革公務員制度的措施，包括公務員薪酬福利制度檢討、人事制度局部改革等，增加公務員與執政班子的矛盾。公務員減薪是必要的，但對公務員反對高官問責制不啻火上澆油。

在社會各階級、階層已普遍遭受亞洲金融危機及經濟嚴重衰退打擊的背景下，特區政府過分強調削減財赤而不適當地採取緊縮政策。 63

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

（四）若干受社會關注或關乎社會利益的事件處置有誤關於前財政司司長梁錦松買車事件的處理，有違問責制精神。關於 SARS 突然衝擊所引發的公共衛生危機的最初應對，暴露問責制主要官員缺乏應變能力。

四出路何在？

（一）應當給予高官問責制以公正評價特區第一個 5 年證明，傳統公務員隊伍不能適應香港的政治過渡和經濟轉型，需要改革。高官問責制體現的改革方向和目標是對的。

人們容易把一種新制度與實施該種制度的最初人事班子的表現相混淆，也容易因為一種新制度欠完善而將它否定。因新制度而利益受損的群體更容易產生必欲除之而後快的心理。

高官問責制以及問責制主要官員的不足，既有它和他們自身的因素，又有外部因素，需要加以區別。作為改革的第一步，新制度體現妥協或折衷是為了穩定，但因此也就必然存在不同文化、不同利益集團之間的磨擦或對立，從而，影響新制度的運作和效率。由於港英當局沒有也不會為特區培養“一國兩制”、“港人治港”、高度自治的人才，所以，新制度缺乏可供挑選的人才—— 優秀專業人士不等於合格政治人才，傑出行政人員不等於出色的公共政策制訂者。

（二）需要從幾方面來改進高官問責制需要提高香港全社會全面準確地理解和貫徹“一國兩制”、“港人治港”、高度自治的水平。這是特區政府執政班子理念一致的源頭。

需要提高特區政府的公共政策研究水平，政策制定、貫徹和調整必須具有合理的依據。需要加強特區政府與傳媒和市民的聯繫，使政府的公共政策盡可能反映民意並引導民意。需要加強問責制主要官員與公務員之間溝通，培育特區政治文化。這需要較長時間，因而需要高度重視。需要在保持穩定的前提下，適當擴大問責制官員的範圍並儘量吸引優秀高級公務員來擔任。特區第二屆政府關於公務員制度採取任何進一步改革措施都需要非常慎重。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Closing Speech 閉幕辭 Mr. Paul Yip 葉國華先生

ABSTRACT It is always not easy for those governing to strengthen government leadership and government’s relationship with the people. In discussing the problems in the governing of Hong Kong today, we cannot neglect its uniqueness. We have to understand the “special” conditions in Hong Kong before we can derive solutions for the problems faced by the Hong Kong government. Hong Kong has several “special” conditions. They include the framework of

“one country,

two systems”; and the unfavorable conditions under which we have governed, such as the economic downturn as well as the SARS and bird flu outbreaks. Unlike the pre-reunification government, in dealing with many of our problems the present government always has to consider the views of the Beijing government and has to co-operate with Mainland governments. The Hong Kong government should also understand its citizens’ concerns during policy enforcement. In the past seven years, we have exceeded the manoeuvre room under the “one country, two systems” as understood by the Beijing government to achieve such successes as CEPA. Has Hong Kong made good use of this? We should attempt to gain greater trust from the Central government on us. The discussion on political development is essential for a better governance of Hong Kong, but it is not the only challenge we are facing. We have to solve other problems like budget deficits, and to set out direction for Hong Kong’s future economic development. The government should ensure the effective functioning of the executive-led system. It should also encourage the independent think tanks to undertake more policy researches and encourage the business sector to support these think tanks.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

如何強化政府的領導，與及如何加強市民和政府的關係，不只對香港，對世界上任何一個執政者而言，時刻都是「重中之重」。但今時今日談及香港管治上遇到的種種問題，卻不得不強調其環境的獨特性；惟有認清香港特區之「特」，我們才可因應香港的獨特情況，思考如何改善政府施政的力量和與市民的關係。

一國兩制下的香港管治特區管治之「特」，首先是香港的管治是在「一國兩制」的框架內實施。有人認為，回歸後政府管治之所以出現問題，全因為在「一國兩制」的框架下，特區政府不少重大的，涉及中港關係的政策，都要考慮協調北京的意見或情況，例如基本法廿三條的處理，以致沙士期間的衛生措施，都要跟內地取得配合，各種施政都要注意到港人的理解及對施政的期望，要平衡北京對「一國兩制」的理解的落差。加上回歸後的政、經環境的變化，亦非原有制度、原有理念、原有條文可以解決，故此認為港英時代，沒有「一國兩制」的包袱所限，形與質都是殖民地的模式，一切倫敦說了算，反而沒有理念上的落差和港人對民主參政的預期，管治顯得有效得多。但事實上，回歸後到如今，中央對特區政府確是履行其「高度自治」的承諾，這是有目共睹的。回歸前一切的疑慮都沒有發生，即使是 1999 年人大常委就內地人所生子女的居港權問題釋法，亦是特區政府提請，而非中央主動出手的。「一國兩制」原先容許的空間，在過去七年均有意無意地，超越北京的理解而擴大，包括對特區管治，原先的確是留下很多的空間可供發揮，例如特首利用「一國兩制」的空間，提出一更緊密經貿關係等經濟措施，是成功的例子。政府和社會過去有沒有好好把握？這是值得深思的。

「一國兩制」下要有效管治，便視乎如何在尊重一國的前提下，充分理解兩制的差異，積極的聽取民意、並融匯貫通民間有建設性的進言。人大常委副秘書長喬曉陽，曾經以「建橋」來形容香港的民主發展；我在此借他的比喻一用 — 因應香港的獨特情況，特區管治要有效，必然要做到像一條貫通北京和香港人民的橋樑，要互為疏通和貫通的，包括經濟政策、政制發展以及如何協助消弭兩地的文化差異。香港需要一個剛柔並濟的政府領導班子，採取主動跟北京和市民溝通， 66

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

並取得平衡；在政制的發展和改善管治的問題上，我們可以從容面對，錯則改之，對則堅持。

不利因素下的香港管治過去幾年經歷擊退金融風暴對香港的沖擊、經濟衰退與及沙士、禽流感等危機，香港的管治制度尚算站立得穩，但整個政府和社會均元氣大傷。可以肯定，真正對香港有承擔的人，必會明白特首以及主要官員的職責實屬重擔。有輿論表示，沒有外圍因素的「突襲」，香港的潛在的、歷史上遺留下來的、管治制度上的問題，未必會如揭開「潘朵拉盒子」般呈現在人前。但事實上，所謂有危必有機，外圍環境的惡劣，或許可以促使管治制度的更新。中國古語有云，窮則變，變則通，清初實行文化融和政策，才有「康、雍、乾治世」的出現。又如英國伊利沙白一世推動改革運動，止息天主教與新教於政、經各方面持續多年的糾紛，教改成型亦造就了英國發展的黃金時期。同樣地「前車可鑑」，管治遇到難題不一定要「停車」─全港市民與政府只要認清香港所處的現實大環境，參照中外歷史經驗，環顧全國裏外的大局，適時團結一致、理性地「繞個彎」，或會為香港扭轉乾坤，全在我們一念之間。

香港政制發展面對的大局是甚麼呢？總理溫家寶表示，目前要爭取和平環境，繼續有二十年的穩定發展期，是中國最最頭等的任務。一般認為這種發展意味「中國崛起」，最重要的是這種「發展」與「崛起」應以和平的方式進行，不會走霸權道路。因此，我們的市民如何以行動和各種渠道，增加中央的信心，在香港政制發展等議題上，也儘量用溫柔的方式，走前半步，體現出一個負責任的、以民為本的政府與中國特區公民的視野、信心與風範，這是非常重要的。

在此我要指出，政制發展的討論和摸索對香港長遠的管治是必要的，但絕非惟一的挑戰。當周邊地區或城市，經濟迅速復甦，貿易全球化進一步深化之際，我們急需解決香港的財赤問題，急需找出香港未來經濟發展的藍圖和路向，並與社會各界一同落實，發揮我們的創意。因為社若再只糾纏於政制爭拗，或會再次阻礙社會的經濟轉型和發展，香港的整體發展便會滯後，這絕非港人之福；我深信香港各界有識之士，必不會只顧政制發展的爭拗，任由香港這艘「船」的經濟「龍 67

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

骨」日趨落後而不顧。

行政主導與香港管治要有效管治，一直要確保行政主導有效執行。但行政主導是管治的原則與精神，不等於要撇除立法的制衡與合作；況且綜觀世界較成熟的政制，包括民主國家或城市，雖則憲制上是三權分立，與特區不同，但實質的運作越來越傾向行政主導，可見理論和實踐上，行政主導不會與民主發展勢不兩立，問題是香港市民要認清這是中國憲法下的基本法，所賦與的地方高度自治這個事實。反而一個能有收集並體察、回饋民意的政制，當政府要推銷其政策理念時，會更容易取得社會廣泛共識和支持，反而更有效加強行政主導。另外，政府鼓勵民間加強政策研究，包括就香港未來的發展策略和轉型作出研究，政府施政的理念才有廣闊的民眾根基、決策有跡可尋；故此，鼓勵智庫發展，商界多些支持獨立智庫和政黨進行研究，香港的決策才能走向專業化。當中國過去十年以來，務求建立科學的、專業的政策制訂架構，及不斷改善政府的管治之際，香港有沒有這方面的反思和探討呢？這是我們應該深思的。香港特區實行「一國兩制」是前所未有的實踐，寶貴的經驗還在積累之中，完善一國兩制，全國上下、香港市民、特區政府，人人有責。「一國兩制」是一個前所未有的實踐，這是對我們中華民族智慧的巨大挑戰，如何回應這個挑戰，作出正確的回應，再創香港的輝煌。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

小組討論重點 Main Points in Table Reports 「加強政府的領導」 Session One: "Strengthening Government Leadership"

「強化市民與政府的關係」 Session Two: "Enhancing Government-People Relations"

Conference Secretariat 研討會秘書處: Hong Kong Policy Research Institute - 5th Floor, China Hong Kong Tower, 8-12 Hennessy Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong 香港政策研究所 - 香港灣仔軒尼詩道 8-12 號中港大廈 5 字樓 Tel: (852) 2686-1073 Fax: (852) 2648-4303 Email: governinghk@hkpri.org.hk

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

小組討論重點「加強政府的領導」 A 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1.

中央政府對香港管治的影響及其重要性

如何發掘、認識及量度「中間選民」的意志

行政長官的認受性

影響政治發展的因素包括中港歷史、文化及價值觀

中央政府、特區政府及市民的溝通及協調

共識的事項: 1.

政府應將中央的系統納入作為香港政制發展的重要參考，並應建立有效的溝通渠道及機制。香港應加強對中央政府權力架構及諮詢系統的了解，而中央亦應加強對香港的社會文化及政治氣候的認識，彼此建立互信和溝通。

跟據講者所說『中間選民』對政制立法有重要影響，與會者希望探討及尋求凝聚及體現『中間選民』意志的方法(包括選舉)，或能代表『中間選民』的政團或組織(包括政黨)。

爭議的事項: 1.

中央是否已有香港政制發展及市民參與政制的時間表？部份與會者希望中央能公開時間表，而部份則質疑中央並未有時間表，甚至只是中央單向地列出政制發展步伐。

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

政府應將中央的系統納入香港政制發展的重要參考，並應建立有效溝通渠道及機制。香港應加強對中央政府權力架構及諮詢系統的了解，而中央亦應加強對香港的社會文化及政治氣候的認識，並建立互信和溝通。

根據講者所說『中間選民』對政制立法有重要影響，與會者希望探討及尋求凝聚及體現『中間選民』意志的方法(包括選舉)，或能代表『中間選民』的政團或組織(包括政黨)。

市民對普選的訴求是基於現時行政長官缺乏認受性。

政制爭論深層意味著中央政府及香港大眾之間存在中港雙方的文化、歷史及社會的差異而造成誤解。雙方之間的『中間人』並不夠了解香港。我們建議應以兩地的文化、歷史、教育及社會角度檢視政制發展。

\ 70

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

B 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3. 4.

政府,中央對市民的溝通態度溝通深度爭取普選政策效率

共識的事項:

1. 2.

現時雙方在溝通態度方面有問題，特區政府及中央以封建家長式態度, 把反對意見者視為不愛國，不確認中央和香港有文化差異，雙方相互對立, 難以有效溝通政府沒有好好利用現有的溝通機制 (諮詢制度)

爭議的事項:

1. 2.

在溝通態度有問題的情況下，加強溝通渠道有沒有用現時的溝通渠道是否足夠

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

1. 2.

雙方應放下成見，建立互信和平等的關係，以改善溝通。政府應增加溝通渠道，廣納民意，和好好利用現有機制，如增強區議會和諮詢委員會的職能，不只做溝通的表面功夫。香港市民應在有限制下，與中央商量，盡量爭取政改空間政府在政策推行前應容許足夠時間策劃, 以改善行政效率

3. 4.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

C 組 (上午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: 高官問責制提高市民對政府施政的期望，但隨着各種政策的失誤，這期望漸漸落空。市民

因而產生對普選的訴求。 2.

市民不滿政府表現，也不滿政黨表現。若然有選舉，也沒有可當高官的人才。

政務官回歸後的權責未釐清，跟有沒有普選特首無關。

面對中央對香港的强勢和立法會之間的抗衡，97 後以「行政主導」為主的希望，實際上已失敗。

2. 共識的事項: 1.

政制要解困，一定要中央和香港一同合作和溝通

希望中央接受健全的政黨運作和發展

公務員(特別是政務官)士氣低落，政府一定要正視

3. 爭議的事項: 07/08 是否適合有普選？如何解決中國和香港文化差異之死結？政黨如何能突破，跟中央遘通？公務員士氣低落原因 – 是因高官問責制介入和失效，或是因為政務官制度本身有漏洞，不能與時俱進？

1. 2. 3. 4.

4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

分開行政長官和立法會兩個選舉，分別向中央爭取 – 例如先爭取行政長官普選，或

會得北京支持 2.

以遊行和立法會選舉表達市民訴求

政務官制度改革

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group D (am) 1.

Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Governance Problem predates 1997 but has been exacerbated by post 1997 administration Practical solutions necessary The need to empower leaders Limitations (both people and system) Would a “Super CE” be able to do much given current restraints?

2. Area(s) of consensus: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Need closer links between exco and legco Increase responsibility of political parties Increase electorate so government is perceived to have mandate of people Need to empower our leaders Need practical solutions , not just theoretical analysis

3. Area(s) of contention:

None Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

Problem of governance predates 1997, but since then has been exacerbated by personal and individual policy failures. The problem extends to political parties. We need specific practical solutions more than theoretical, academic analysis To solve the problem, we must empower government leaders (including CE, senior officials) to strengthen the executive- led system of government and the civil service. Means to do this are difficult, but not impossible. They include: A) Forging closer links between executive and legislative councils B) Enhancing responsible role of political parties C) Expanding electoral bank of election committee to make the Government be seen by the public to be representative.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group E (am) 1.

Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1.

Potential for democratic development

Structural changes

Cultural changes

Relationship with Beijing

Civic education

Business

Area(s) of consensus: 1.

Potential for democratic development – The HKSAR Government is an executive-led government, yet it remains a weak government. Is this contradiction due to the personalities of the current leadership or does it reflect intrinsic structural weaknesses in the system itself? Many of the problems now faced by the government pre-date 1997, but have been exacerbated by the current leadership, and there appears to be little real potential for political change in the next five to seven years. • Developing an acceptable political system requires the consensus of many different sectors. Ultimately, the system must be democratic or it is meaningless. If the ultimate goal is democracy, what do we do if democracy is not attainable? • Is it more important to reform the entire political system or to develop democratic institutions? Reforming the system may enhance accountability, but in the absence of democracy, even after political reforms have been implemented, people will not be able to choose the best government. • The Basic Law could be a tool for change, but in many cases, the Basic Law is misinterpreted or simply ignored. For example, the Basic Law states that the Chief Executive should be responsible to LegCo, and this is clearly not the case.

Structural changes – Political development in Hong Kong will require reform of the system of government. Simply changing the voting system or introducing universal suffrage will be insufficient so long as the system remains flawed. • The HKSAR government needs to find ways to continue to reform itself despite the existing institutional constraints. The widespread dissatisfaction with the way in which the 74

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

system works, both within and outside the government, should be seen as a challenge, rather than as an obstacle to change. • There is a need to streamline the system by reducing the number of departments and bureaus and increasing cooperation, rather than conflicts, between departments.

Cultural changes – There is a need for changes in the government culture, which is self-perpetuating and elitist. • Within the government, there is a lack of understanding of terms like “accountability,” “authority” and “responsibility,” and the way in which these concepts relate to public affairs. Civil society could play a role in helping civil servants think through what these terms mean and how they operate in practice. • Restructuring the government system would enhance creativity and energy within the civil service and facilitate a change in culture. For example, the increased financial independence of the Hong Kong Post Office has prompted a cultural change from the top level down.

•

The effectiveness of the AO system should be reconsidered. This system is based on the philosophy that government affairs should be managed by “generalists” who are familiar with a wide variety of issues and can in turn provide direction for specialist “technicians.” While the AO system worked well up until the 19th century, there is too much knowledge today for any one official to master. This has resulted in “arrogant ignorance” among AOs, who, despite their limited knowledge, continue to have the attitude of “we know best.”

Relationship with Beijing – There is a need for a mechanism to alleviate the current situation with Beijing that falls somewhere between confrontation and appeasement. • To what extent is the standoff between Beijing and Hong Kong regarding local political development a proxy war over democracy in Mainland China and can Hong Kong separate itself from this larger issue?

Civic education – • There is a need for civic education among Hong Kong’s young people, particularly at the secondary school level, in terms of both skills and awareness. Hong Kong’s education system does not foster the kind of skills needed for good citizenship, including creativity and 75

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

independent thinking. This, coupled with the general lack of awareness of political issues among young people, will have a significant impact on Hong Kong’s future development. The quality of the education system and the quality of governance are interdependent. • More research on political issues is needed to foster intelligent, rather than emotional, discussion. Civil society can help fill this gap by conducting research and organizing public events. There should be more discussion on issues like political accountability on a community-wide level, rather than restricting the discussion to NGOs and the government.

Business – The role of business in government affairs lacks legitimacy at present. Business involvement in political issues should be legitimized to allay the fears of the pro-democracy camp.

3. 4.

Area(s) of contention: None Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

There is a need to reform and restructure the entire system of government in Hong Kong to foster an ethos in public involvement in decision-making. This will require changes in the culture of the governing class and a shift in relationships and attitudes within government.

More broadly, the government needs to commit to engaging various community stakeholders and representing their views in the formulation of public policies.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group F (am) 1. Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. Hong Kong’s political system 2. Government’s perception 3. Political consultation 4. The need of political talents 2. Area(s) of consensus: 1.

The weaknesses of the political system are the fundamental issue. If it is not improved, all the other issues cannot be dealt with effectively.

3. Area(s) of contention: None 4. Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1. The system itself is a weakness 2. The government only listens to what she likes to listen 3.Consultation is not a real and sincere consultation 4. Political talents, we have. But we don’t have a system to let them come to the stage

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

G 組 (am) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 香港的政制問題 2. 其他的結構性和制度性問題 3. 政黨政治發展 4. 行政立法關係 5. 香港社會現在是否過於政治化 -- 大學縮減開支是焦點例子。

共識的事項: 1. 中國因素是討論特區政制問題時不能忽視的。當中﹐最重要的未必是近月來中央政府或部份在港人士提出從政法層面的角色外﹐即赤裸的權力或政治現實問題﹐而是更根本的中國文化的考量。特首以至特區施政無效的關鍵是﹐特首是結構性弱勢的領導多于個人問題。正如李鵬飛

(演講嘉賓之一) 說﹐我們需要多才多藝﹐ 高質素的政治領導﹐但是﹐恐怕全球也沒有一個全能萬有的領袖。關鍵是政治領袖有沒有一個有效的執政團隊 -- 執政黨。港英式的諮詢架構已經變得無效。今日的社會民意不限于傳統精英專利，唯有‘其身

正’(即特區有能力妥善管治內政﹐經濟穩定﹐井水不犯河水)，才可向中央提出要求。

爭議的事項: 1.

事事主動與中央直接溝通(甚至謀求認可或賦予權力) ﹐對香港的‘高度自治’到底是正面還是負面﹖有人認為﹐坦誠溝通可以讓中央政府了解特區的動態和善意﹐中央對特區放心才會放手(權) 。但也有人認為﹐凡事主動上京等於架空特區政府和特區的自治原則。

2. 4.

不是所有人都同意﹐ 中央於特區的關係是‘父子’的關係。

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 香港的政制問題遠遠超越 ‘普選’; 最核心的問題是政治專業培訓﹕這不單限於政治人物 (政黨﹐政治任命的主要官員﹐特首) ﹐還包括公務員隊伍和市民。政治領袖除了需要國家和國際層面的視野﹐更加需要建立政治權威。政治工作技巧以及個人班子。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

H 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 香港的優勢 ( 公務員操守, 支持一統, 法制完備, 市場經濟自由度大) 香港的問題成因 (國際環境, 客觀的危機如 SARS , 金融危機) 當前的香港制度問題

1. 2. 3. 2.

共識的事項: 香港目前的問題是由於就國際環境原因而成，有客觀與主觀兩方面制度的原因, 特首的能力和有效管治

1. 2. 3.

爭議的事項: 對於問題的解決對策: 1. 2. 3. 4.

民主選舉加強政府的授權民主政治需要成熟的政客與選民增加中國國內與香港對雙方的了解

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 沒有

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group I (am) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The need to build political capacity within the Hong Kong community Business community needs represent the interests of Hong Kong as a whole The media must not instill fear, but promote understanding Power brings obligation – Beijing must respect Hong Kong Transparency in government helps build its credibility.

Area(s) of consensus: 1.

The business community’s repeated assertion that a “rush” towards democracy would harm Hong Kong is without basis.

Area(s) of contention:

None Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback:

Discussed the current leadership, its structure, and a need for developing the potential of future politically active citizens: 1. Hong Kong’s managerial talent is present in both public and private sectors. However morale is low in the public sector, and many capable people are underachieving. This is partly due to a lack of leadership and direction within the government. 2. The maladministration within the government can be fixed without the intervention of Beijing as they are municipal issues. 3. We need to capture managerial talent and develop political talent. Our leaders of tomorrow need to be more politically savvy than the majority of current politicians. 4. The challenge is: how do we allow talented people to emerge in a non-confrontational way? 5. In order to foster understanding and make wise choices for Hong Kong, dissenting voices MUST be included in advisory committees, political parties, think tanks, etc. It is imperative to engage the resources of the whole community. It is acceptable to agree to disagree – but different perspectives must be heard. The government must be more inclusive. 6. The business community has a powerful role and needs to use this to be more specific about solutions and fund the development of political talent. 7. An influential new community group offering a different perspective from the business community’s should be formed. 8. The CE can’t be effective if he doesn’t have the mandate of the people. Other issues: 1. Government needs to look closely and critically at how democratization affects free market economies. 2. The government can gain the people’s trust by being transparent. 3. From every corner, there is a need to agree to disagree – both within differing views in Hong Kong as between Hong Kong and Beijing. 4. The NPC confirmation of CE/Executive led-government brings a reciprocal obligation to ensure community participation

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group J (am) 1. Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1.

The governing problem of Hong Kong

Ideological difference between people in Hong Kong and Mainland China

Role of Central government

Suggested solution for Hong Kong government

2. Area(s) of consensus: 1.

Both structural and human problem create the governing problems of Hong Kong. Structural problems refer to the governing systems, including the legislation and administration systems. Human problems come from the mismatch of people with the job assigned. Solving either one won’t be adequate.

Hong Kong government has almost no support, thus leading to difficulties.

The system needs re-evaluation/examination but not uprooting. (Cutting of jobs only deals with the budget.)

There is a huge ideological difference between the people in Mainland China and in Hong Kong. This leads to mistrust and insecurity. China wants to let Hong Kong people the ruling power but Hong Kong Government increasingly sends signals to China that they cannot rule. If there is an adequate governing, China would not feel insecure. Also, ideological difference skewed China’s understanding of events in Hong Kong.

Without a common view of Hong Kong, no one looks at the common vision of Hong Kong – not government, not legislature, not Beijing, not CE

We need to acknowledge the role of central government, although we may think it interferes with HK politics. We need to acknowledge its role under the “one country two systems” policy.

3. Area(s) of contention: 1.

Disagreement – concerning opposition party; some people think that the opposition party 81

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

cannot work with government, all they can do is to hurt the government ruling power. While some people disagree this. 2.

System needs radical change to accommodate more election.

4. Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

We focus too much on direct election; that is too simplistic; either way is not addressing the real problem. Also, we did not address the structural problem (government vs. legislative council, government vs. civil servant). We need a goal to guide the common energy.

Suggested solution: If China can provide a long term timetable for general election in Hong Kong (if not 2007, 2012 or even 2017), it can help focusing people’s energy to get ready, so that we can work step by step and slowly. Also, we can be prepared to increase the quality of politicians and citizenship.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group K (am) 1.

Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4.

Politically aware of Hong Kong people Affect of economic downturn The effect of media and political parties Accountability system

Area(s) of consensus: 1. Poor leadership skill of the Chief Executive and the lack of coordination skills of the Chief Executive: quality of chief executive need to be strengthened 2. Improve the team of the Chief Executive, that is, a team with the same vision and direction of government 3. Parties move forward from opposite parties to participate more in policy studies 4. Without direct election of the chief executive, the pre-97 approach, despite its defects, is still better than not doing anything to address the post-97 problems

Area(s) of contention:

None Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

People are more politically aware, thus creating pressure for the government Economic downturn further weakens the power of the government The media and the political parties are stretching the government agenda Accountability system and coordination between government departments, cabinet and bureaus further worsen the government governing effectiveness All these features contribute to the formation of “powerless government”

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

L 組 (上午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: 1.

有關政府的政策的執政權力

香港人的義務與權利

政府對人才的吸納

改善現況的建議

2. 共識的事項: 現存的問題： 1. 香港現時沒有一個執政權力：政府的政策並沒有一個強大的隊伍推行；議會內政黨一方面投票支持，另一方面在行動上卻不配合，多番批評，令港府施政遇上不少阻攔。 2. 市民過份著重個人權利：如港人的民主理念乃著重個人的選舉自由和權利，以致不理後果地支持普選；又如現時不少團體(不論是政府或非政府的)，為保自身的皇國或擴大之，不惜浪費公帑也要耗盡該年度的撥款，以求下年資源不會被削。因此港人應在義務與權利間取得平衡。 3. 政府偏重吸納商人精英：政治與經濟是互動的，前者不能從屬後者，港府過往過份著重工商界的意見，雖然當中不乏企業精英，但這不能代表全體港人的利益，否則教育、外交等範疇不會有所改善。 3. 爭議的事項: 沒有 4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 建議：接納正面意見，消除不合理言論：如香港有雄厚的財力，並不像楊森(民主黨主席)所說現在港人民不聊生，所以政府和市民須分清何謂善意的批評。

1. 跟中央政府合作：這乃是從需要的角度看，港人不應將共產的意識形態和中央政府扭合，而該分清不愛黨不等於不愛國。

2. 民智為本，普選為次：普選並非萬能，現時港人民智(知識+智慧)尚未成熟(由青少年選 Twins 為崇拜偶像可證之)，故有必要培養港人對政治的認識及智慧，亦有需要培育政府人才。不過，亦有組員提出應借普選來提升港人民智，因為普選出來的領導人乃是選民的抉擇，港人自然會加倍關心。所以在這議題上，可說是雞與雞蛋的問題。

3. 商人組黨：回應香港總商會副主席蔣麗莉所說，商人應組黨，在政府各方面的政策上多發言。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

M 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1.管治威信的問題制度問題領導班子個人素質問題 2.政府與社會的溝通的問題

2. 共識的事項: 1.制度問題現行的問責制使架構變得複雜，公務員未能發揮原有功能，而公務員多不能短時間適應「空降局長」並與他合作；問責官員亦未能善用媒體，導致在推出政策時常與社會產生誤會。 2.

領導班子個人素質問題現在的管治班子推行政策時有欠決斷，對反對聲音過份顧忌。因個別團體總會由本身利益出發，故任何決策也會招致反對聲音，若一項政策對大眾有利，應決斷執行。

3. 現在政府與社會的溝通呈現出嚴重失衡。決策者拒絕反對派的聲音，而只在議會爭取「保皇派」的足夠票數以推行政策，亦使市民有一種感覺政府只聽命中央而漠視市民的意見。這一「由上而下」的高壓方式使市民和反對派反感，導致他們傾向以抗爭模式去表達意見，使社會呈現兩極化，亦不利政府管治。

3. Area(s) of contention:

沒有 Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any):

參考意見： 1. 政府在推行政策時應爭取與市民溝通、推銷，在社會上、輿論上爭取支持，而不要讓社會認為政府只聽命中央。 2. 在制定政策時，亦不要只考慮經濟，忽略民意，導致市民認為政府只故強勢階層的利益 (例如房屋政策)。 3. 善用傳媒能有助穩定社會 (例如在「SARS」時與傳媒合作便是一個好例子)。而當傳媒在報導政策、公共事務等失實時，要盡快作澄清而釋除公眾心中的疑團。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group N (am) 1.

Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Need better communication between Hong Kong government and citizens Society needs harmony; Government needs to listen to all voices Government needs to have more guidelines for media Lack of “national interest” perspective in current political debate HK is not well trained in the field of “politics” and lacks political talents

Area(s) of consensus: 1.

We have a “weak government” in Hong Kong, with many governance problems on all fronts.

Need better communication

(a) Between Beijing and HK; (b) Between government and public; (c) Between different political factions Government does not show any actions of trying Despite consultations, opinions of the people are not reflected Government lacks skills to deliver messages Different culture in Hong Kong and Mainland China; we need to enhance central government’s understanding on our thinking The leftists need to reach out more Central government should understand Hong Kong people more, she should listen to the voices of different levels Reconciliation will require not just communication but also understanding 3.

Government should not “listen selectively” Just helping the big businesses Saying one thing but doing others and acting in a different way

Area(s) of contention: 1.

Some participants think that Hong Kong has not been going through the kind of political upheavals and processes like in Mainland, so we do not have the same ability to understand and appreciate Chinese politics.

Democracy as the ultimate goal is a certainty that will be achieved, but some participants believe that many Hong Kong people have a fear of the Mainland (communists) and may easily succumb to meddling by overseas elements.

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

There should be a “training program” for future Chief Executives or politicians.

Some participants expressed disappointment with the conference because they think that registration should be more open to accommodate more different sectors. There should be many more similar political forums involving the ordinary people at the grassroots.

Some also expressed disappointment that no one presented the perspective from the “national interest” and “one country first” points of view.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

O 組 (上午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4.

香港人民對民主的訴求及香港如何定位建立香港人民與北京政府溝通渠道香港與中國要建立共識：香港政黨政事的前景如何，以及香港面前的定位如何。公務員士氣低落的問題，如何提升政府的威信與管制。

2. 共識的事項: 1.香港的管治不利，包括內外部因素：對內是對民主訴求的混淆，而對外與北京或國際發展所面臨的局限性。 2. 香港自身定位不清楚：與北京政府的關係、與國際關係。 3. 香港的政治文化逐漸的向中國大陸傾斜，而使得香港也逐漸的失去了香港所具備的特色和優勢。 3.

爭議的事項: (正) 香港是否有了民主的直接普選，就可以解決香港目前所面臨的難題，民主是否是唯一的萬靈丹。 (反) 香港所面臨的種種問題，實際上是體制問題，沒有一個健全、透明的、相抗衡的政治體制，一切則都是空談。

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

香港如何重新定位 1. 對中國, 北京政府的定位, 確定自身的角色,加強與北京的溝通, 縮短彼此認知上的誤差, 進而建立彼此的共識與互動。 2. 香港政府在國際上的定位, 藉着在地理位置上的優勢, 擴展國際市場, 促進經濟發展。 3. 香港政府對香港人民的定位, 香港政府應建立香港人民與中國北京政府的溝通渠道, 在一國兩制下, 創造和諧社會, 進而建立政府的權威與公信力。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group P (am) 1. Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The need of system reforms (e.g. Chief Executive election) because of today’s malfunctioning government September election and the method for Hong Kong to function effectively The importance of civil education The quality of government officials is questionable Importance of party politics in the future development of Hong Kong’s political system

2. Area(s) of consensus: 1. The upcoming September election may introduce further paralysis in the Government operations (esp. if the Democrats and related parties get a majority) 2. Party- politics will be increasingly important in HK -- that is an inevitable development 3. Area(s) of contention: 1.Will there be significant changes after 1 September? If the Democrats get a majority, will they act responsibly? People are very worried about the relationship between legco and government. 2.Is there anything that HK citizens can do to help the situation? 3. Are HK citizens too much of “complainers”? What’s wrong with them? 4. How can we raise our voices in a peaceful and constructive way? 4.Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1. 2. 3. 4.

Governance decision is being distorted, e.g. civil servant is forced not to follow guidelines Government need to resolve imminent crisis between leg co after Sepember 2004 election and the SAR government/ Chief Executive We need to open up communications channel with Mainland China Hong Kong people’s demand for political reform is very clear

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Q 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1.在管治文化方面的問題特區政府的施政破壞過往的「遊戲規則」（rules and regulations），而且經常沒有標準地行使酌情權，給予太多「例外」（exceptions）的情況，令人無所適從。政府可能沒有注意，這是一個「牽一髮動全身」的問題，違反一次規則，便足以動搖政府的整體施政。特區政府的施政亦過份具有人治的色彩。問責制度本身使其中的主要官員各自為政，而行政會議亦沒有發揮協調或統籌的作用。 2.在市民訴求方面政府與市民溝通斷裂，市民感到沒有渠道向政府直接表達意見。市民期望政府以公平原則處事。

2. 共識的事項: 1. 2. 3. 4.

社會缺乏對政府的歸屬感。政府威信偏低。權力過份集中於政府。傳統的公務員體制被打破。

3. 爭議的事項: 1.

人大常委會作出決定後的政治形勢有意見認為普選未必就可以解決所有問題，但應開展深層研究。又有意見認為不可忽略北京的因素，加速民主化有可能使抗爭白熱化。另有意見認為只有通過直選或其他具代表性的選舉方法，才可以解決香港政治體制上的結構性問題。

4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

政府及市民都應為普選訂定目標和時間表如果說 2007 年香港施行普選的條件並未成熟，那便應盡快訂定目標（例如 2012 年）和方法使之趨於成熟。現在沒有努力，便說香港要二十年後才可以施行普選是不能接受的。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

R 組 (上午) 1.曾提出的主要議題:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

如何扶助弱勢政府管治人才的質量政府應重整政務官隊伍行政長官及主要官員與政黨的聯繫對三屆特首的候選人的要求

2.共識的事項: 沒有提供 3. 爭議的事項: 沒有提供 4.綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

逼在眉睫的問題是如何扶助弱勢政府。這問題上，香港需要學習，不要怕沒面子，況且我們已交了極高昂的學費。

管治人才在質與量都不足夠，要借外面的人才，多方面吸納精英。

「前車」的港英政府善用摃桿原理吸納精英，以利管治。此做法值得保留，並加以發揮。

政府應重整政務官隊伍－－給予他們清晰的指令，重振他們的士氣，讓他們看到前景及堅定信心。這對凝聚 17 萬公務員的骨幹有幫助。

在制度上，行政長官及主要官員不能有政黨聯繫，先天造成行政與立法割裂。董特首行高官政治任命的問責制，是半步改革，但在內部未能解決問責官員與公務員系統的磨合問題，在外部又未能得到市民和社會的認受。

三屆特首的候選人，在得到北京祝福之餘，也必須得到六百萬市民的認同。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

S 組 (上午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4.

行政/立法關係普選的重要性政府對政策解釋清楚與否的問題民間實是有智慧，如何運用？如何豐富？

2. 共識的事項: 1. 2. 3.

要關注行政/立法關係，要減少紛爭。普選很重要，現階段要擴大所有功能組別的民意基礎。政府對政策解釋不清楚，內部醞釀亦是不足。實是更需要繼續提出。

3. 爭議的事項: 沒有 4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

制度窒礙發展，特首選舉/問責，公務員/政治人才培訓機會缺乏。

缺乏市民與政府直接溝通和表達意見的平台；這個研討會提供一個很好的機會給市民表達意見，但是這些活動舉辦得太少而又不是政府舉辦的，政府實應該要加強這類型的溝通渠道。

07/08 年未必是合適的普選時間，但市民對民主普選的時間表的訴求卻很大。

政府內部（政策局與署）溝通不足，互相推卸責任，是否應該合併？

議員衹懂批評，沒有建設性的意見。為什麼？是為反對而反對？是能力不足？是資源不足？實需要再探討。

如果 09/2004 後行政與立法會的關係惡化，我們應怎辦？有沒有人提點出來？

既然 07/08 沒有普選，政府應盡快提出時間表，給反對派回應，良性互動，互相衝擊。

現階段弄成這個分化的局面，實是特首(40%)、官員(40%)和市民(20%)等做成，現時香港要有一個強勢領袖。

官員有責無權，衹做 Yes Man。

10. 市民不應再埋怨任何人和任何事，要大家一起努力，想想如何利用自己的一票，去改善現時的境況。 11. 政府應提供渠道予市民與中央溝通，因民意與中央有大鴻溝。 12. 政府/特首要實事求是，要謙聽和尊重民意。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

T 組 (上午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1.

民主直選在香港的發展是需要「配套」

實行普選引致的困局

特區政府的表現

政治論述太過簡化

2. 共識的事項: 直選是最終和最理想的政制發展方向；把政治鳥籠拿起一點，能加強特首的認受性。 3. 爭議的事項: 香港是否應該有凌駕性的價值觀及法治人權嗎？

4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

民主直選在香港的發展是需要「配套」──個人素養的培育與社會機制配合，共識政治的接受，而政府應該付出耐心，並就此做更詳細長時間的諮詢。市民需要透明度和各方都遵守的遊戲規則。

當年「江握手」奠定了中央不信任特區的局面，因此，中央不願意減少其控制。如果實行普選，特區政府就要面對「兩個老闆」（中央與港人）的困局。

回歸以來，特區政府本應由代管政府到現代化的服務政府，但現在的政府卻是一個封建政府。

現時的政治論述太過簡化，諮詢之所以會失敗，是因為大部人都無法掌握語言 (language)和論證的能力(discursive power)，要在這方面下功夫。

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

小組討論重點「強化市民與政府的關係」 A 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3. 4.

政制改革的發展問題 9 月立法會選舉基本法 23 條立法台灣問題

共識的事項:

政府諮詢不足：政府沒有把港人的意思如實反映給中央政府，空有諮詢架構，但不代表政府已把權力下放，透明度又不夠，導致市民不信任政府。香港正步向一國一制，遊行必然持續。唯一的解決辦法是要有足夠的時間諮詢市民和調查市民的意向

領導人(董特首)管治能力差：董特首 3P (politics, policy, public relation)欠佳，人民可以在 9 月立法會選舉選多點民主派人士。根據基本法，當兩次財政預算案不獲通過，特首便要下台；或由中央暗中另組班子，架空董特首

政治管治有問題：高官問責制不行，中央又不夠成熟接納兩制；政府推銷手法不夠好，故很多政策最後行不通。加上傳媒的報導，假如它與政府對著幹，會令社會兩極分化

中港兩地文化不同：中央習慣人治，選聽話的人做事，但香港是法治，必須有足夠的自由和空間，香港寶貴的地方是兼容，以及金融、經濟制度成熟，不能像中國

爭議的事項:

政治不穩定是影響本地經濟的主要因素，應少談政治，以經濟為目標 vs 全球性的經濟蕭條較主要

政府偏聽 vs 施政者有權作選取

政府應把權力下放 vs 人民素質有限，雖然香港確有不少政治人才，但無人肯站出來；現在不少議員質素有限，只懂被選民牽著走，因此時候未到

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 沒有

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

B 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 5. 6. 7. 8.

政府,中央對市民的溝通態度溝通深度爭取普選政策效率

共識的事項:

1. 2.

爭議的事項:

1. 2.

在溝通態度有問題的情況下，加強溝通渠道有沒有用現時的溝通渠道是否足夠

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

1. 2.

3. 4.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group C (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

The need to improve communication between people and the government Who should be blamed for the present conflict? The role of media How to improve representation in consultative/ appointed bodies? The need to enhance civic awareness

Area(s) of consensus:

The government needs to 1. be more open to accept different viewpoints 2. act as the mediator between Hong Kong people and Beijing 3. better convey people’s wishes to the Central government 4. improve relation with the media 5. conduct more policy research People should be better educated about their civic duties/ role 3.

Area(s) of contention: 1.

Should the media be more stringently controlled? - one view is that the media abuses its power at times and should be under some kind of monitoring mechanism - counter view: how can this be done without sacrificing some degree of speech freedom. 2. Should the Chief Executive assume responsibility to consult the community on political reform? Some suggest there may be conflict of interests Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any):

--None--

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group D (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 14. Communication channels between the HKSAR government (the Chief Executive and principal officials) vis-a- vis the citizens are limited 15. Relations and communications between the Mainland and Hong Kong citizens are inadequate 16. Various consultation bodies of HKSAR do not function effectively. The membership seems to be narrow and biased towards the supporters of Tung Chee-hwa in CE election 17. The role of media in promoting communication between the Government and the HK people, and between the Central Government and HKSAR is controversial.

Area(s) of consensus: 1 . There are serious problems in communications, as the government does not take it seriously. Its ruling style is authoritative and lacks sincerity. 2 . There is significant gap in understanding between Mainland and general Hong Kong citizens as regards the pace and nature of political development in HKSAR, and this gap can be further traced to cultural differences. 3. The abilities and leadership skills of the Chief Executive are questionable.

Area(s) of contention: 1. The role of the media is controversial. Some say the media have been too negative, throwing in too much criticism. Others believe the media is only doing its job, and HK people are not so easily misled.

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1. Hong Kong people should try to improve their understanding about the Central Government and its policy agenda and priority.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group E (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1. Hong Kong’s poor recent record in effective communication between the Government, the media and the public. 2. Ways to improve the Government’s approach to and system of advisory bodies and consultation on public policies. 3. The responsibilities and expectations of the media. 4. Reasons for the continuing “feel-bad factor” among the Hong Kong public - political and economic. 5. Attitudes to current problems displayed by public figures, including members of the conference panel.

Area(s) of consensus: 1. On issue (1): a major obstacle to communication between the Government, the media and the public is the lack of understanding displayed by many in Hong Kong of the realities and constraints faced by the Mainland (cf the comments on this at the morning session of this event). We need in particular a Chief Executive who can inspire trust in both the Mainland and in Hong Kong. 2. On issue (1): public consultation in Hong Kong is more extensive on non-constitutional issues. The limits to the consultative process are not clearly set out or admitted by either the Central or the Hong Kong Government. This failure to “come clean” provides easy ammunition to the “democratic camp”. 3. On issues (1) and (2): the traditional system of public involvement and consultation through an extensive network of hand-picked advisory bodies worked well in the 1970’s and 1980’s, but no longer provides sufficient legitimacy to satisfy public aspirations. It is also no longer efficient in accurately reflecting public opinion on increasingly complex and often divisive policy issues. 4. On issue (3): criticism of lack of freedom of the media and claims about the erosion of public liberties generally in Hong Kong are considerably exaggerated, both in absolute terms and in comparison with other “democratic” administrations in the region such as Singapore and Malaysia. 5. On issue (4): the origins of the malaise are clearly economic rather than political. This can be seen by comparing the situation in the years leading up to re-unification in 1997: the bitter political controversies and the exodus of many people fearful of the transition did not prevent a self-sustaining and confident economic boom. Even after 1997, when the Government was guilty of some egregious policy errors and had failed to live up to the expectations it had itself raised through the setting of over-ambitious targets, it was still possible to adopt a neutral or 97

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

indifferent stance politically. This position changed after the mass protest in mid-2003. Thereafter public attention focussed inexorably on politics, and even the most apolitical members of the “silent majority” had to recognize that political controversy – and political decisions – had a direct bearing on their livelihood. 6. On issue (5): the serious problems now being faced by all sectors of society in Hong Kong require informed study and practical solutions. Too often what is heard from public figures is propaganda or, at best, as with some of the speakers on this occasion, over-academic analyses without concrete suggestions for improvement. 3.

Area(s) of contention:

issue

(2): The

system of

public consultation

and participation has been

weakened post-1997 by the abolition of the Urban and Regional Councils and the relative demotion in role of the District Councils. Their place has been taken by a plethora of pressure groups with their own limited agendas. This has contributed to a lack of new political talent. A contrary view: the lack of maturity of political parties (particularly on the right) is rather to do with the failure of the Government to give a serious enough rule to the legislature. The concentration of focus on territory-wide issues is by contrast a healthy development. 2.

On issue (3): the media, written and broadcast, often lacks balance. Reporters need to recognize their public responsibility as purveyors of unbiased information. It is arrogant to suggest (as did one speaker at this event) that the media can or should constitute an “alternative democracy”. The “Article 23” controversy is a case in point: while the media gleefully focussed on the Government’s inept publicity, they failed to highlight the real advantages of the Bill as it stood just before being shelved. An historic opportunity was lost. A contrary view: The media can only report on the basis of the facts and opinions put before them. If the Government’s argumentation for and presentation of its case are seriously flawed, then bad publicity and negative media coverage should come as no surprise. And while it is inevitable that the popular press will often sensationalize and highlight bad news, it is also true that a basically popular Government receives much more sympathetic and forgiving treatment than an unpopular one. So the present media attitude of (at least) suspicion towards the Government cannot be written of as an aberration.

On issue (3): the media cannot even be trusted to report simple matters of fact: their various political biases militate against this. A contrary view: The different political stances taken by the media are a sign of pluralism and one of Hong Kong’s great strengths. Their “biases” are well known and fully understood by the Government, as is also the case in Western democracies such as the UK.

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 98

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

On issue (2): Given the Chief Executive’s inability to bridge the gap between the Government and the public, lower profile measures are needed. These include the broadening of the scope and role of advisory bodies recently suggested by the former Chief Secretary, Sir David Akers-Jones, as well as the strengthening of the mandate of the legislature (for example, by increasing the representativeness of the Election Committee) discussed at the morning session of this event.

On issue (2): the Hong Kong Government should seek to re-direct the political energies of the public by honestly, clearly and sympathetically focussing attention on the areas allowed by the parameters of the Central Government.

On issue (2): wider opportunities and greater incentives should be given to those with serious interest in policy formulation to participate in this process, whether through the advisory system or even ad lection to the ranks of Senior Officials.

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group F (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1.

Public participation in decision making

Enhancing accountability

Hong Kong and Beijing

The media

Principal Officials Accountability System

Political talent

Area(s) of consensus: 1. Public participation in decision making – What is needed is an ethos in which those who are governing involve those who are governed; without this, accountability is meaningless. Older systems for involving the public, such as the advisory committee system, are no longer effective, and new systems to fill the same purpose do not yet exist. •

There is a lack of a commitment by the government to involve the community throughout the decision-making process. The community is informed of policy at the end of the process, so that public feedback tends to be negative, rather than constructive. When a major policy is being developed, the government should hold a public meeting similar to meetings held for the Big Dig Project in Boston, USA.

•

The lack of a government platform makes it very difficult for the administration to build consensus on issues. This is exacerbated by the government’s failure to listen to public opinion and its unwillingness to consider dissenting opinions. The end result is that on difficult issues, the HKSAR government falls back on Beijing for guidance.

•

The advisory body system offers a useful means for involving different sectors of the society in decision making and seems to have been an important tool during the colonial period for “vetting” policies and building consensus. However, this system is now used as a way of rewarding people rather than gathering views on issues.

•

Elected representatives should be facilitators for citizen involvement. However, there is often a lack of understanding of this role, for example, among rural committees.

Enhancing accountability – Changing the mindset of the government may be the most important step in enhancing accountability, as the HKSAR government seems to be stuck in an outdated and ineffective paradigm. However, it remains unclear how changes in mindset are to be achieved. 100

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

•

Everyone agrees on the need for stability, but this is only possible with real accountability. While it would be desirable to have a more democratic system of government, the existing channels could be used more effectively to increase government accountability. A major difficulty, however, is that the Chief Executive is not willing to listen. Therefore, even if advisory bodies were more effective, their input is unlikely to be considered. Ultimately, both the structure of the government and the personalities of the current leadership mean that real accountability is not possible.

•

Attempting to discuss political reform with the HKSAR government may be a “dialogue with the deaf.” Several of the afternoon speakers expressed frustration with the current government system but did not seem to expect any real response or change.

•

In the absence of true electoral politics and accountability, focusing on government-people relations is misplaced. The focus should be on checks and balances, since Hong Kong lacks the mechanisms and systems that would make governance work.

•

Do people in Hong Kong understand what accountability means?

Hong Kong and Beijing – The different views expressed by the afternoon speakers appear to indicate a huge gulf in mindset between Mainland China and Hong Kong. On a fundamental level, China does not understand Hong Kong’s priorities and goals.

•

Whenever the HKSAR government is faced with a problem, it falls back on the colonial strategy of referring to the higher-ups, which are now in Beijing rather than in London.

•

There is a need for Hong Kong to understand what self-governance means in practice. Hong Kong is too close to the US economically and too close to China politically. What steps can we take to be more self-governing?

•

Hong Kong was an international city in the past, but seems to be becoming more of a Chinese city. International voices are no longer welcome, especially on political issues.

The media – There is no media organization in Hong Kong that is independent of government or advertising. At the same time, the government needs to improve its own PR strategy to improve its reputation.

•

Press freedom is a major potential problem in Hong Kong. There is a general lack of 101

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

understanding that the media has an important role to play in the political process, as evidenced by the fact that media organizations need to defend this role.

POAS – Contrary to the views expressed by the fourth speaker, the HKSAR Government has no plans to evaluate or restructure the Principal Officials Accountability System. The argument that this system will improve on its own given sufficient time is disingenuous and dishonest.

Political talent – Tung has suggested that the lack of political talent in Hong Kong is a reason to delay democracy. However, this is a systemic rather than a resource problem. Hong Kong does not lack political talent; rather, the current government system does not encourage the application of these talents.

Area(s) of contention:

-- None -4. Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

There is a need for both an ethos of and a system for public involvement in policy formulation from the outset. This will require a change in official mindset so that the government is more receptive to a wide variety of views. The key issue then becomes how this change in mindset can be achieved.

Can changes in mindset be forced, and, if so, via what mechanisms or institutions? Alternatively, is it possible to foster buy-in from the government by developing a common vision for the future? In order to see things differently, it is necessary to know where you want to go, and when you want to get there. The situation is complicated by Hong Kong’s relations with Beijing. In negotiating with the Central People’s Government, Hong Kong will have to use “gentle persuasion”, rather than force, to achieve its goals.

102

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group G (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1. 2.

Government’s attitude in consultation Top officials’ understanding in current living condition in Hong Kong

Area(s) of consensus:

The attitude of the Government in consultation is the key issue 1. 2. 3.

The government is not sincere in consultation The top officials do not understand the living condition in Hong Kong Even if the government does not pay attention to the voice of the people, we should not stop speaking out

3. Area(s) of contention:

-- None -Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any):

We should have a wide choice of media. We don’t care whether media have their own viewpoints. As long as we can choose, people can judge by themselves what the truth is.

103

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

H 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2.

市民與政府的互信關係非常弱，成因是家長式或阿爺式思維，還是因為市民批判能力強但求真能力低、諒解能力弱。區議會的角色作為市民與政府的橋樑，功能是重要的。

共識的事項:

市民與政府的互信關係弱 3.

爭議的事項:

傳媒的角色是反映民意？還是製造民意，醜化政府？ 4.

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

政府施政及政策制訂要公平，公開及透明。市民在批評政府時要講事實，公道，須超越個人利益的視野。政制方面, 須擴大區議會職能，強化區議會作為市民與政府溝通的橋樑角色。

104

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

I 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3.

治理權由制度決定，參與權及選舉權在這制度下應被保証，並且能保證香港自由經濟的地位 (尤其在亞太區) 否則 “一國兩制”就是一個失敗主權是沒有什麼好談的集權及民主都各有好處和缺點

共識的事項:

主要擔心的問題是目前香港的政治制度一方面沒有集權的高效率，又沒有民主制度下各種力量的制衡，因而產生種種的矛盾和衝突。 3.

爭議的事項:

香港目前的管治問題是政治責任與行政責任混在一起，兩者的責任沒有分清楚，造成政治行政制度的混亂。 4.

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

香港的重點是要經濟繁榮，保持香港在亞太地區經濟中心的地位。如果沒有這一點， “一國兩制” 就失去意義。

香港目前的當務之急是要改進當前的制度。

好的管治應該是高效、透明、以及以市民為主的。

105

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group J (pm) 1. Key issues addressed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 2.

Area(s) of consensus: 1. 2.

The government needs to better use the media as a vehicle for its messages. The POAS system has largely failed to show any of the promised effects, and the apparent enthusiasm from Beijing for the system seems out of touch with its reality. Many Hong Kong people have disregarded it because of its shortcomings.

Area(s) of contention: 1.

POAS and the Government’s level of accountability. Why do we have a crisis in governance? Communication between Beijing and Hong Kong Government and its use of the media and other organizations (eg, NGOs)

Some participants commented that people go to the media because they don’t realize they can go to the government directly. Other participants thought that the media are a more effective way to communicate than going to government officials. Who is to blame for the current crisis in governance? Some participants felt that Beijing is to blame – in the 1980s, Deng Xiao-ping stated that China needed to “nurture talent” for Hong Kong’s leadership. This has not happened. How did China prepare for sovereignty? China should try to understand Hong Kong better; it is incumbent upon China to look at the issue of Hong Kong’s sovereignty. The end result of China’s apparent ill-preparedness is a lack of political skill at the highest level. Other participants felt that it was Hong Kong’s responsibility to adequately educate its future leaders.

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

2. 3. 4.

6. 7.

The POAS system was originally put in place to facilitate communication between high ranking officials and the constituencies. This hasn’t been the case, government has become more internally focused, and the gap between government officials and the public has grown. POAS should get back on course to cover its original aims. Government sees the media as a problem, not as part of the solution. Government must be more media savvy and know how to present itself to the community using the media. Government doesn’t use its advisory committees as it should; some don’t meet at all, others don’t have an agenda. Use this valuable resource. There is a chronic disparity of understanding between Hong Kong and Beijing, as well as the HKSARG and Hong Kong citizens. As one participant said, “There is a need for a stereoscopic view, but our boss is a Cyclops.” Citizens need to take advantage of mechanisms in place to voice their opinions, such as NGOs and political parties. The government needs grassroots support; why don’t their consultation processes work? Hong Kong people and decision makers in Beijing speak past each other. There needs to be a collaboration between the two sides and a willingness to accept concerns from both sides. Hong Kong needs to find a unified voice to most accurately represent its perspective to Beijing.

106

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

K 組 (下午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

傳媒公正性傳媒工作人員素質政府能否放權地區民意反映政治人才

2. 共識的事項: 1. 2. 3.

香港傳媒，有收聲的情況。有些報導的評論不敢放開，有些則模稜兩可，只向北京的喜惡。香港非人才不足，而是需要提供平台給予培養人才的地方。市政局，區議會都是培養人才的地方。政府用收緊資源的方式，令不喜歡的地方組織面臨收縮的壓力，地方組織無唱所欲言的空間。

3. 爭議的事項: 1. 香港媒體太一面倒批評政府，電台 phone in 節目批評太多。 4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1. 提高傳媒質素 – 傳媒作為市民與政府的橋樑，質素非常重要 2. 傳媒應保持中立 – 不能有以自己對錯的喜好影響公眾 3. 政府須下放權力 – 尤其在區議會層面

107

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group L (pm) 1. Key issues addressed: Agree to focus only on the discussion of “the press” 1. Is Hong Kong media a channel for communication? 2. Media must be given the freedom to function well in the civil society 3. Parties/ groups in society are not sufficient or active in HK to influence government

2. Area(s) of consensus: 1. 2. 3.

Quality of the press need to be upgraded – some newspapers are only for entertainment but not to look for the truth Government must foster more space and resources for NGOs ( NGOs only numerous in quantity, but not active ) Today’s seminar is not heard by the government, participants come for “interest” only

3. Area(s) of contention: 1. 2.

Should the role of press be “代議” (代議 should only be the function of elected politicians) Only report and reflect society’s opinions while scrutinizing the government.

4.Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): -- None --

108

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group M (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1.

Communication channels between Government and citizens

Functions of political parties, media and organizations.

Suggestion for the Government, think tanks, academic institutions and the Hong Kong people.

Area(s) of consensus: 1. Communication channels between Government and citizens are plentiful but not effective. The Government simply does not appear to be interested in getting feedback. 2.

Even if the Government is willing to accept feedback, it is unclear which political parties, media or organizations truly represent “the People”.

Area(s) of contention: -- None --

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

Government: When it comes to important issues, the Government should actively solicit feedback from the People to determine vision and direction.

Such vision should be clearly

communicated to the People, and be implemented according to a clearly defined work plan. 2.

Think tanks and academic institutions: The role of think tanks and academic institutions are very important. Independent research would help the Government determine what constitute “People’s feedback”.

The People: In addition to thinking about public policies based on their own interests, the People should learn how to think from the Government’s perspective, to understand the constraints faced by the Government and the interests that the Government needs to balance.

109

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group N (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Relationship between the Hong Kong government/ the Beijing government/ the Hong Kong people How to channel energies from talented people and the support from the mass? China’s political technique The government has confused absorbing professional expertise with having public representation Insufficient channels for Hong Kong people to express their ideas

Area(s) of consensus:

Most participants shared about their views of how the Hong Kong government (and Beijing government) should treat the “opposition party”. Most felt that the opposition party does represent Hong Kong people’s voice even if they have sometimes been too radical. So, China has to accommodate their opinions.

There is no need to alienate Hong Kong people.

China’s political technique has been immature, forcing themselves and Hong Kong into a lose-lose situation (similar to the way they handle Taiwan).

Both sides should find ways to have more

constructive communication. 3.

Most agreed that the media is a friend and is closer to Hong Kong people than the government. Hong Kong has freedom of speech but this quality is deteriorating after 人大釋法 (Since centralized control lowers freedom).

Area(s) of contention:

Regarding a “Social Contract” of Hong Kong people and government, there is NOT really a common consensus besides economic prosperity and stability. What are the common values shared by most Hong Kong people? What are the stories behind these values that justify these values? Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any):

Hong Kong people have been under colonial mentality for a long time and do not know China and fear China and always oppose China. There is awareness that Hong Kong people (politicians or not) lack an adequate understanding of China’s ideology and the way they handle politics.

Media tend to be more extreme. We lack a moderate voice. The government’s role should be (although it has not been) the moderator between Hong Kong people and Chinese government to enhance mutual understanding.

However, each side still fears the other and lacks a basic trust to

communicate. 3.

Members in the Democratic Party (mostly educated in the West) tend to use Western way to think and treat problem (not thinking from China’s perspective).

They need to be less impulsive and

need to consider issues from the government’s perspective also. 4.

How to channel energies from talented people and the support from the mass? We need common goals and directions (at least some consensus of what we can do to go forward). We need to be patient for result but have common direction to work step by step towards the goal. 110

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Hong Kong people do not have enough channels to express their opinions to the government except through the media and by demonstration. Furthermore, the government does not have good channels to express HK people’s opinions to Beijing and let HK people communicate with Beijing (moderated discussion).

The government should listen more closely to those who are informed and not only to those who are rich and powerful, it does not even listen to middle class. The government is not confident enough to listen to any opinion that is different from its own so the ideas it listens to are filtered by political view before they are expressed.

Regarding channels of communication, the government needs to formalize a process of communication. The government also needs to know its role in this process, need to first listen and then to channel the opinions to Beijing. We need a working system before the right people can function effectively in the system.

The government has confused absorbing professional expertise with having public representation. Absorbing more middle class professionals does not necessarily mean more public representation. It needs to know which one is its aim (perhaps there can be a balance).

111

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

O 組 (下午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 2.

溝通應包括香港和北京, 政府與市民及各不同陣營態度要理性和正面, 但現時有分歧人權自由是香港人非常重要的一環政府施政要顯示市民有份參與研討會作為溝通的渠道

共識的事項:

雙方面的責任: 1. 市民應多學了解中國文化和昔日的殖民歷史。 2. 政府制度方面：要確保政府有聽取各方法意見,，及有否考慮普選的可能性。 3. 政府應主動引導傳媒以達到有效溝通。 3.

爭議的事項:

沒有提供 4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi.

中國和香港應互相諒解我們應多了解彼此的歷史和傳統在制度上加強政府和市民的溝通可用方法: 以行業/界別來收集市民意見政府或其他團體應多辦同類型研討會有效的溝通, 不一定政府施政百分之一百的跟隨民意，但要顯示市民有份參與

112

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group P (pm) 1.

Key issues addressed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Area(s) of consensus: 1. 2. 3. 4.

There exists a consultation mechanism but it is ineffective. The HKSAR government only selects people who support its policies into their consultation mechanism. The HKSAR government is uncertain about their own value system. Thus, the HKSAR government would not know how to prioritize its various policies. Without knowing how to prioritize its various policies, the HKSAR government will not be able to balance the interests of different sectors (large businesses, SMEs, NGOs, academic institutions, etc.)

Area(s) of contention: 1. 2. 3.

The value system upheld by the HKSAR government Consultation mechanism of the HKSAR government The level of trust between the government and the HK people Balancing interests of different sectors Availability of political leaders in Hong Kong

Does Hong Kong really lack political leaders? Does the HKSAR government want to restore economic prosperity by copying the public policies of the 60’s and 70’s? Does Hong Kong lack a level playing field?

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

The HKSAR government should design a mechanism to measure the effectiveness of their various policies – i.e. not only whether the government has delivered but how well it has delivered its policies. The government should clearly show to the public the value system it upholds, i.e. not trying to please everybody.

113

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Q 組 (下午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

英人治港時期, 採取精英人才治港, 但目前這批精英漸不被重視。政府應盡快恢復諮詢系統, 在政治上發揮機制。一國兩制體現了中西文化的特色, 香港在未來面對政治轉換的過度期要能繼續保留西方文化中的基本價值, 例如人權等。民意上達的機制管道是不暢通的。媒體必須要能自律, 才能真正發揮”代言” 的功能。

2. 共識的事項: 1. 2.

對香港的西方文化, 特別是政治文明, 自由公平的社會是非常不足的, 而一國兩制之下, 如何保留並延續這樣的文化特色是今後大家所關心的課題香港與北京政府在政治理念上的認知(誤差太大, 如何推近彼此的距離？)

3. 爭議的事項: (正), 香港的媒體在發揮”代言” 功能上, 有時反而是曲解民意, 即傳媒並不是完全代表民意, 所以政府要有效地與媒體解釋政策。 (反) 香港人民的公民意識與素養有一定的水平, 民眾有辨別是非的能力, 無須太管制傳媒, 以至於影響香港已有的言論自由。

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

香港應繼續保持共有的社會價值, 自由, 平等, 公平的社會, 進而縮短香港政府。人民與中國和北京政府認知的誤差。

2. 疏通民意上達的機制，重新建立政府諮詢系統。(香港政府與市民, 香港政府與中國，香港市民與中國) 3. 50 年什麼會變？什麼不變的？中國無論在政治事務各方面急速發展, 身為國際城市的香港, 更應釐清自身在與中國的關係與國際的情勢找到自身的定位, 才能發揮優勢，拓展政治經貿的領域。

114

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group R (pm) 1. Key issues addressed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 2.

Area(s) of consensus: 1. 2. 3.

The importance of media freedom The difference in mindset between the average Hong Kong citizen and the traditional Chinese leaders Need to defend privileges under the Basic Law (like media freedom) The difficulty of getting universal suffrage for electing the Chief Executive in the near term

In the short term, we must be realistic and understand that the Chinese government will not let Hong Kong citizens to elect the Chief Executive by one man , one vote Media are an important channel to reflect public opinion and a right that we should defend CH Tung is part of the problem- - reprimand him will not help if the system stays the same

Area(s) of contention:

Whether there is anything that we can do in the short-term 1. 2. 3.

We can fight for small wins despite the severe limitations We should not fight but accept the reality, and should try not to ask for unrealistic things As long as the fundamental system is not changed, we will continue to feel the same way because of the lack of representation. Therefore the most important thing to ask for is universal suffrage

Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): 1.

We all understand the current situation, namely the reluctance of the Chinese government to grant more autonomy to HK 2. However, accepting this reality does not mean that nothing can be done, or that we should not take proactive steps to ensure that our basic rights are protected 3. Suggestions i. Protect media freedom ii. More communication between HK citizens and HK government and Beijing government iii. Continue to push for system reform (but at the same time be realistic) iv. Beijing should choose better people than Tung to lead the HK people

115

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

S 組 (下午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3.

香港的言論自由回應葉國華提出的「兩個老闆」之說，香港的股東應是港人，而非中央。媒體並非謾罵政府，反而是不少傳媒機構「歸邊」，幫政府或作左派陣營的喉舌，情況越來越嚴重。

2. 共識的事項: 1. 2.

言論自由收窄、諮詢言詞不通、令中產人士越來越萌生移民念頭，恐移民潮再現，雖然大部分人或移居內地。現時的諮詢制度並不足以培養政治人才，但就如何改善有不同意見

3. 爭議的事項: 有的認為諮詢制度應作根本性的、翻天覆地的改革，但有與會者卻持相反意見，因為：1.

諮詢制度運作順利與否，視乎領袖和主事官員的作風 – 例如未改革前的房委會，在決策過程中充份醖釀，便得以消減體制外的抗爭；一些地區較有政治手腕的民政專員亦是一樣，可幫助疏導怨氣。地區的諮詢架構如區議會等能發揮作用，所以認為並非制度上有缺憾。應重新了解港英時代「行政吸納政治」的方法。

4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 沒有

116

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

T 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: (Please fill in major issues raised at the discussion group in bullet form, if possible, please prioritize them by identifying number one is the most important.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

文化差異對兩制的衝擊民間組織和傳媒的功能關於政府與市民之間的諒解如何改善現行諮詢架構對於中產階級在溝通上的作用

2. 共識的事項: 1.

文化差異對兩制的衝擊這是一個涉及根本原則、意識形態及價值觀的問題，而這又足以影響個人權利及法制等範疇。政府與市民欠缺共同理念（mindset）作為溝通的基礎。中央政府或特區政府先對若干問題作出決定，其後只是對市民「頒佈」及說服市民接受，而沒有諮詢或溝通。特區政府較傾向運用家長式的管治手法。

民間組織和傳媒的功能民間組織（包括社會服務團體）和傳媒在政府與市民溝通之間應扮演更積極角色。民間組織可以各自集中社會上類似的聲音，匯聚而成為一股可供發揮的力量。

3. 爭議的事項: 1.

如何改善現行諮詢架構有意見認為現有諮詢架構的工作未夠深入，應該加強。但又有意見認為諮詢架構的焦點不在人數的多寡，而在於能否切實反映「民意光譜」。

對於中產階級在溝通上的作用有意見認為香港現行政治體制難以吸納中產階級，而中產階級也是最難代表的。但又有意見認為中產階級最有條件參政。

4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 1.

政府與市民之間欠缺諒解一位在席公務員表示，公務員比較多從自身部門或從政府的角度去觀察問題（包括政治和民生等），而較少從其他角度去考慮，現在也沒有渠道促進公務員與市民之間的交流。政府與市民都應該降低溝通的「門檻」，嘗試找出共通點。

為捍衛香港的一制不惜付出代價在承認香港與內地文化具有差異的同時，香港必須堅持本身的一制，否則可能會被內地同化，而香港亦應竭力捍衛言論自由和法治，因為這兩點是香港得以立足的唯一優勢。

政府應重視知識份子要得天下，便先要得民心；要得民心，便先要得士子之心。傳媒和輿論某程度反映著士子（知識份子）之心，故此政府應予重視。 117

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

Group U (pm) 1. Key issues addressed: 1.

There is a need for sincere consultation with NGOs at the policy level

Development of more effective District Councils and Advisory Boards would provide a training ground for future HK politicians

HK people need to further understand China’s concerns in relation to democratic development

HK Government needs to improve its methods of Public Consultation and Policy Development

HK Government needs to improve its relationship with HK Citizens

2. Area(s) of consensus (as reported back to the conference) : 1.

Government needs to change its mindset to one where it sincerely wants to consult and listen to diverse views and decide policies based on the merits and broad support of ideas put forward. We believe the Government should consult early in its policy evaluation process when it is setting up its basic objectives.

The Government should improve the consultation mechanism by broadening and diversifying the composition of advisory boards and committees, work more closely with NGOs (who also need to genuinely want to cooperate with the Government) and give a measure of authority and budgetary responsibility to the district Councils, which help train and nurture future politicians.

3. Area(s) of contention: No major areas noted 4. Summary of participants’ suggestions or feedback (if any): (1) HK Government relationship and consultation with NGOs •

Further collaboration and co-operation between NGOs and the HK Government is necessary

•

HK Government officials view NGOs defensively.

Similarly, NGOs that work too closely

with the Government are condemned as “collaborators” – no one wins in this defensive environment •

HK Government Officials don’t provide an opportunity for dialogue with NGOs – they often attend events in a ceremonial way and leave no room for discussion. If they don’t have time to stay at an event then they should at least nominate representatives to stay and report back proceedings and discussions with NGOs

•

There is a need for non-political mediators who can link the HK Government with NGOs

•

The HK Government treat NGOs as beneficiaries (through provision of grants) and there is generally a lack of empowerment of NGOs – resultantly NGOs don’t develop the incentive to take further responsibility

•

Consultation between Government and NGOs must be at an early stage – before Governments 118

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

take firm positions on issues – often this is not the case and NGOs are hardly ever consulted at the policy development stage

(2) Training ground for future HK politicians •

HK needs a system or systematic training ground to develop future politicians

•

Government needs to develop a better system of advisory boards and district councils so that they can become more of a breeding ground for politicians

(3) Understanding China’s concerns in relation to democratic development •

HK people should understand the Chinese Government’s background and concerns on political development and then, bearing this in mind, offer alternative approaches for development.

•

Both HK and Chinese governments need to change but this must be done through a process of understanding each other.

•

Focus should be on setting a program that ultimately convinces the Chinese Government that HK is ready for universal suffrage

•

People are increasingly getting emotional in their reactions to China’s comments - they forget that the rules have now changed (post 1997) in that HK must take notice of China’s concerns

•

Would be helpful if officials from Mainland China come to HK on a regular basis to explain China’s position and views and to discuss them with the HK public – developing a channel where views can be exchanged

(4) HK Government needs to improve its methods of Consultation and Policy Development •

Government consultations never include the overarching goals or 1st principles – it makes it difficult for NGOs and others to contribute if they are unaware of the goal. (An example of a good consultation document was the Law Reform Commission on Anti-Stalking – the document set out the background and noted what different stakeholders’ concerns may be. Hence even before the debate reached LegCo all parties had an understanding of what the key issues were and what different stakeholders concerns were – this allowed a more effective debate.)

•

There is a shortage of people who can think at a macro-level in government – they are not coming through the education institutions and are not being developed in government. Greater links with local think tanks at policy levels would help this.

(5) HK Government’s relationship with HK Citizens •

Government should work at improving cohesion – getting people together to both voice and listen to opinions is a way of doing this. 119

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

•

Hong Kong people need a common goal and it must be something more. substantial than “don’t like the current CE” – for instance, long-term economic stability.

•

The HK Government is beginning to talk and respond to the public more as was witnessed during SARS. This trend should continue.

120

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

V 組 (下午) 1.

曾提出的主要議題: 1. 2. 3. 4.

政府與傳媒的相互關係政府的諮詢技巧政府對非政府組織的態度北京跟香港的互信問題

共識的事項:

在香港的政制發展中，「一國」的前提為市民普遍接受；但北京跟香港互相不信任，這需要大加改善。 3.

爭議的事項:

沒有 4.

綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有):

政府要善於利用傳媒的代言人角色，要掌握民意；傳媒則要負責任地扮好橋樑角色。

政府在諮詢方面讓人覺得缺乏誠意；政府要改變此印象，顯示誠意。

政府要改變對非政府組織的不信任、「怕」的心態。建議立例規定非政府組織的負責人，可成為政府諮詢組織的當然成員，加強其代表性和認受性。

121

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」研討會 8 May 2004 香港 Hong Kong

W 組 (下午) 1. 曾提出的主要議題: 政府如何利用傳媒政府與市民需要一個平台如何強化區議會要更有效利用諮詢制度

1. 2. 3. 4.

2. 共識的事項: 1.

政府應多利用傳媒與反對黨辯論，多利用傳媒此平台。

民意在傳遞過程中會被扭曲，民間組織會更能直接將自己的意見向政府表達。

政府是否不願透露更多資料給市民？

3. 爭議的事項: 沒有 4. 綜合與會者的建議或回應(如有): 4.

市民的眼睛是雪亮的（民主黨最大的助選團是曾憲梓與鄔維庸）。

政府與市民肯定需要一個平台，但是這個平台要建基於公平之上。

如何強化區議會，滅罪會或防火會等諮詢組織。

由學者做的民調是另一類表達民意的方法，但政府又能否留意？

完善現時的制度，例如現有的諮詢委員會是可以發揮作用，如果將一些

重要的委

員會透過由選舉過程選任代表入會，更顯得其代表性。

122

附錄 Appendix

123

「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」 Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” 8 May 2004 (Saturday)

8:45 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.

Programme 程序表登記入座 Registration

0845 – 0915 0915 – 0930

Room 301 HKCEC (New Wing)

香港政策研究所行政總裁 Chief Executive of Hong Kong Policy Research Institute 歡迎辭 Welcome Speech

何永謙先生 Mr. Ho Wing Him, Laurence

第一節專題討論 Session One – Panel Discussion 「加強政府的領導」 “Strengthening Government Leadership” 主持: 張炳良教授 Moderator: Professor Anthony B.L. Cheung

0930 – 1030

香港總商會副主席 Vice Chairman of Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce 順應香港發展促進特區管治 Sustaining Hong Kong Development with Effective Governance 時事評論員 Commentator

蔣麗莉博士 Dr. Lily Chiang 李鵬飛先生 Mr. Lee Peng Fei, Allen

香港的管治與制度問題 Problems with the Hong Kong System 香港發展論壇副召集人 Co-Convenor of Hong Kong Development Forum

梁國輝博士 Dr. Thomas K.F. Leung

行政主導的政府下的問責制度: 原則、實踐與溫「教」知新 The Accountability System in the Context of an Executive-led Government – Principles, Practice and Lessons to Learn 嶺南大學政治學及社會學系副教授兼公共管治研究部主任 Associate Professor, Department of Politics and Sociology, Lingnan University, and Director of Public Governance Programme

李彭廣博士 Dr. Li Pang Kwong

『合一政府』或『分掌政府』？香港行政立法關係的演變和發展 Unified or Divided Government? The Evolution and Development of Hong Kong's Executive and Legislative Relations

1030 – 1040 1040 – 1140 1140 – 1230 1230 – 1245 1245 – 1400 1400 – 1500

1500 – 1510 1510 – 1610 1610 – 1700

小休小組討論

Break

Small Group Discussion

回應及提問 Feedback, Questions and Comments to the Panel 總結第一節專題討論 Closing Remarks of Session One 午膳

Lunch

第二節專題討論 Session Two – Panel Discussion 「強化市民與政府的關係」 “Enhancing Government-People Relations” 主持: 陸恭蕙女士 Moderator: Ms. Christine Loh 香港新聞行政人員協會主席 Chairman of Hong Kong News Executives’ Association 市民與政府的關係: 傳媒的角色 Relationship Between the Public and the Government: The Role of the Media

陳淑薇女士 Ms. May Chan

資深大律師與立法會議員 Senior Counsel and Legislative Council Member 用人唯才 ─ 諮詢制度的成功要訣 Meritocracy - The Key to a Successful Consultative System

余若薇女士 Ms. Audrey Eu

香港社會服務聯會行政總裁 Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Council of Social Service 民間團體：政府與市民互動的中介者 The Third Sector: Enhancing Government – People Interactions

方敏生女士 Ms. Christine Fang

中國光大集團有限公司高級研究員 Senior Research Fellow of China Everbright Holdings Company Limited 高官問責制和公務員制度改革 The Principal Officials Accountability System and Civil Service Reform

周八駿博士 Dr. Zhou Bajun

小休小組討論

Break

Small Group Discussion

回應及提問 Feedback, Questions and Comments to the Panel

1700 – 1715

總結第二節專題討論 Closing Remarks of Session Two

1715 – 1730

香港政策研究所主席 Chairman, Hong Kong Policy Research Institute 綜合總結及閉幕辭 Summary and Closing Message

葉國華先生 Mr. Paul Kwok Wah Yip

124

香港政策研究所

Hong Kong Policy Research Institute

Tel: (852) 2686-1905 Fax: (852) 2648-4303 www.hkpri.org.hk

成立背景

香港政策研究所於一九九五年在香港創立，是一個定位為「非黨派」、「非壓力團體」及「非牟利」而且獨立於政府的民

間智囊機構。在組織架構上，成員大會是最高的決策權力單位，在其下有董事局及各個委員會。研究所的營運經費主要來自受委托之研究項目及社會各界捐款。捐款的管治交由獨立的基金委員會管理。

理念：公眾智囊

香港政策研究所熱心於關注及積極參與香港和中華民族的長遠發展。我們認為應該掌握時勢轉變，努力協助香

港及週邊政府面對各種變化，促進各方的溝通和合作，使公眾及國際投資者能繼續保持對香港現行制度的信心，使香港社會穩定及經濟繁榮。研究所立足於民間，以民為本，並抱著獨立、客觀、理性、持平、公開透明的原則運作，旨在匯集不同意見，以兼容的態度包容各種政治和專業意見，把一個以知識為基礎的人脈網絡逐步編織起來。直至二零零四年初，研究所的成員已由最初成立時的 17人發展至約100人，並聯繫著主要國家的精英超過 4,000人。香港政策研究所的成員來自不同背景的工商界領袖、專業人士和學者。在重要議提上，成員透過各種型式交流，包括政策組、座談會、焦點討論、公開論壇、演說、外訪和接待、撰寫文章、研究調查及意見分折等。成員亦與政府、社會專業人士和普羅大眾產生強而有力的互動和交流。

Background

Hong Kong Policy Research Institute (HKPRI) was established in 1995 in Hong Kong. It is “non-partisan”,

“non-pressure group”, and “non-profit-making” as well as non-government independent in nature. In the organizational structure, General Meeting of Members is the top decision-making unit; the Board of Directors and different Committees are underneath it. The operational income is mainly come from commissioned research projects and donations from the society. The donations are managed by an independent Committee of Governors.

Philosophy: Public Think-tank

HKPRI is actively involved in the long-term development of Hong Kong and the

Chinese community. Members of the Institute believe that Hong Kong’s changing environment could turn into an advantage. It would try to harnessing Hong Kong’s resources to assist Hong Kong and its neighbouring governments to cope with the changes. The Institute aims to enhance regional co-operation and communication between Hong Kong and its neighbours. In its way, the confidence of the public and international investors in the administrative and political system of Hong Kong can be maintained; Hong Kong’s stability and flourishing economy will be safeguarded.

Being a non-government organization, HKPRI aims at serving the people of Hong Kong. It adopts the principles of independence, impartiality, rationality, balanced views, openness and transparency. HKPRI has built up a knowledge-based network and is open to all opinions and endeavour to bring various political and knowledgeable perspectives together. At the beginning of 2004, the membership of HKPRI has increased from the original of 17 professionals to almost 100. It also establishes connections with over 4,000 elites in major countries. Members of HKPRI are leaders and professionals from various fields of business, industry and academy. On important issues, members of HKPRI communicate and exchange their views with each other through policy group, seminar, focus group discussion, public forum, speech, overseas visit and reception, article, survey research and analysis. HKPRI interacts with government officials, professionals and the general public, and exchange opinions and views of the members with them.

125

思匯政策研究所

Civic Exchange

Tel: (852) 2893-0213 Fax: (852) 3105-9713 www.civic-exchange.org

成立背景

思匯政策研究所成立於二零零零年九月，是一個非牟利公共政策研究智囊組織，同時也是本港一個註冊慈善團體。思匯政

策研究所成立的主要目的是要藉著進行研究及發表研究報告，擴大及深化市民討論公共政策。由於公共政策在香港是一個頗新的範疇，思匯政策研究所最核心的工作是協助那些對公共政策感興趣的人士（不論他們在公營或私人機構工作）提升自己研究公共政策的能力，而辦法是透過舉行各類不同大小的聚會以深入探討個別政策問題。思匯政策研究所最主要的研究工作及研究範圍包括：政治分析、政經分析、公共財政、運輸交通、環境、企業社會責任以及大中華政治。思匯政策研究所以合作社形式運作。

使命

思匯政策研究所的使命是要透過加強市民參與公共事務以推廣公民教育、喚醒大眾對管治的關注及提升大眾參與管治的程度。同

時，我們也會綜合不同範疇的技巧和經驗，包括：學術、政治、商界、金融、科技以及非牟利組織，推動一些政策，而這些政策是符合可持續發展原則、具彈性而又非暴力、具經濟效益、公平且具參與性、切合香港情況及對精神有所裨益的。

Background

Civic Exchange was established in September 2000 as a full-time non-profit public policy think tank. It is a

registered charity in Hong Kong. Its central purpose is to carry out research and publish research reports in order to broaden and deepen public policy debate. An integral part of its work is to help build policy capacity among interested parties in the public and private sectors as public policy is a relatively new area of endeavour in Hong Kong. Capacity building is done through various types of large and small gatherings to discuss specific policy issues. Its main areas of expertise include political analysis, political economy analysis, public finance, transport, the environment, corporate social responsibility, and Greater China politics. Civic Exchange functions as a cooperative.

Mission

Civic Exchange's mission is to promote civic education, public awareness and participation in governance by

strengthening civic participation in public life. Civic Exchange aims to advance policies that are sustainable, resilient, non-violent, economically efficient, just, participatory, locally appropriate and spiritually rewarding. Its approach is to integrate skills and experiences across various disciplines including academic, politics, business, finance, technology and the non-profit sector.

126

新力量網絡 SynergyNet Tel: (852) 2377-3117 Fax: (852) 2377-3117 www.synergynet.org.hk

成立背景

「新力量網絡」是一群以香港為家、來自學術、專業、企業、文教、社會服務及政界公職的人士，當中一些人曾積極與

論政及政黨組織，也有無黨派人士，有從事公職服務的，也有在政治體制外推動研討及民間活動的。他們有感於回歸後香港受經濟挫折及政治失效雙重打擊，社會矛盾日深，民眾不少失去自信，無奈怨艾之聲蔓延，遂嘗試聚合各界力量，推動社會對話及理性探索，尋求改革制度、更新政策、重建願景，以切合時代巨變的社會管治新思維，去回應回歸後「港人治港」之挑戰，面向及塑造香港的未來。

特點及宗旨

「新力量網絡」不是傳統的論政團體或壓力團體，而是一個嶄新的、屬於 21 世紀的思想型智庫和政策型網絡，是一個

致力於推動社會對話協商、探求香港前路的「伺服器」，其重點在於重建社會互動的網絡、成為再造香港的新動力。她超越傳統的黨派政治，希望溶入社會更多新力量、新聲音與新視野，發揮最大的反思、倡導與介入的作用。她定位於公民社會，旨在搞活民間，創造理想與想像的空間，凝聚社會協作力量，建言進言，推展理性創新、積極介入的新政治。

「新力量網絡」追求一個兼容、理性、關懷、進取的「新香港」，一個富有文化氣息的國際都會，一個港人感到自豪、國人感到驕傲的特別行政區。並爭取凝聚民意，堅持運用知識，以實事求是、理性探索的態度，為更新政策、改革制度，而鍥而不捨。

Background

SynergyNet is established by a group of intellectuals and professionals coming from the academic, business,

social service and political sectors, who are firmly rooted in Hong Kong. Some of them have been active participants in policy advocacy organizations and political parties, while others do not have any political affiliation; some hold public service posts, while others promote civil society activities and policy research outside the political establishment. SynergyNet aims to synergize various forces in society, to rearticulate public opinion and to push for rational social dialogues that can lead to institutional reforms, policy renewals and vision building. It seeks to respond to the challenges brought along by the principle of "Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong", and to help Hong Kong face the rapid changes of our times with a new paradigm of social governance.

Features and Mission

SynergyNet is not a political party, nor a traditional policy advocacy organization or pressure

group, but a brand-new intellectual think-tank and policy network that belongs to the 2lst century. It operates as a "server" which promotes and facilitates social dialogue and consensus building, and searches for a better future of Hong Kong. It is firmly positioned within civil society, aiming at revitalizing public space, and creating room for social vision and imagination. It goes for synergy and constructive debates, and a new kind of politics that is creative, rational and progressive. SynergyNet is committed to helping build a "New Hong Kong" that is tolerant, rational, compassionate and forward-moving; a cosmopolitan city marked by cultural vibrancy; and a special administrative region that Hong Kong people can cherish and the Chinese nation as a whole can be proud of.

127

香港明天更好基金 The Better Hong Kong Foundation TEL: (852) 2861-2622 FAX: (852) 2861-3361 http://www.betterhongkong.org

「香港明天更好基金」成立的目的，旨在促進各界人士對香港在經濟和社會方面發展的信心。

一九九五年，香港處於後過渡期，一部份國際社會人士對香港前景存有錯誤的見解，當時二十一位對未來特別行政區充滿信心的傑出商界及社會人士，認為有必要消除這種誤解，於是便聯合籌組成立「香港明天更好基金」，目的是讓外國商界及政治領袖能夠分享「基金」對香港特別行政區的信心。現時基金已有二十三位信託人。

「香港明天更好基金」是一個非政治性和非牟利的私人組織，主要工作分四類:

鞏固聯繫，放眼全球

團結力量，關心社會

研討辯論，加深認識

調查立論，實事求是

The Better Hong Kong Foundation was founded to enhance confidence both economic and social – in Hong Kong. The brainchild of a group leading local business and community leaders, the Foundation was established in 1995. It was the response of a group of committed Hong Kong people to misconceptions about Hong Kong’s future as expressed by individual international voices. The Foundation saw a need to share its confidence in the future of the Special Administrative Region with overseas business and political leaders. Now the Foundation has a board of 23 trustees.

The Better Hong Kong Foundation is a non-political, privately-funded, non-profit making organisation. Our work falls under four main categories:

Bringing Hong Kong, China And The Rest Of The World Closer Together

Promoting Togetherness, While Caring For The Community

Independent Facilitator Of Exchange And Debate

Gathering The Facts Through Discussion And Research

128

香港總商會 Hong Kong General Chamber Of Commerce Tel: (852) 2529-9229 Fax: (852) 2527-9843 www.chamber.org.hk 香港總商會始創於 1861 年，是本港歷史最悠久、規模最龐大和最具影響力的商業組織，旨在促進、代表和捍衛香港工商界的權益，現有企業會員約 4,000 家。我們是香港唯一一個真正國際化的本地商會，也是唯一一個本地化的國際性商會。會員包括跨國集團、中資企業和香港公司。香港總商會是一家自負盈虧的非牟利機構，能真正以獨立團體的身份，代表香港特區工商界的廣泛權益。去年非典型肺炎爆發期間，我們致力幫助會員渡過難關。早於四年前我們提出「內地與香港更緊密經貿關係安排」（「安排」）這個構想，亦於去年六月順利簽署。為助會員瞭解「安排」，本會已編製一份報告，詳細分析協議對各行業的影響，廣受歡迎。再者，我們還舉行多個關於「安排」的研討坊和小型午餐會。我們與全球和中國內地緊密聯繫。本會對世界貿易組織、珠江三角洲和「安排」素有研究，協助會員在內地和海外探索商機、擴展網絡。此外，我們亦緊貼環球經濟和內地瞬息萬變的營商環境，又為會員提供認識世界各地政府官員和準業務夥伴的機會。通過我們的商貿配對活動，許多會員得以建立商務往來。政府施政方面，本會在芸芸香港商會中最具影響力，這有賴於我們與政界人士和政府官員關係良好，更重要的是，我們經常就經濟和工商政策給予政府專業建議，包括每年提交施政報告和財政預算案意見書，還不時就教育、內地專才、環境、知識產權保護、商業收費等政策表達見解。本會之代表合共參與 40 多個政府委員會和公共機構。本會定期舉辦多元化活動以促進會員友誼，如會員聯歡晚宴、每月舉辦的歡樂時光、以及高爾夫球同樂日等，這些活動皆有助會員拓展商務脈絡。香港總商會積極推廣香港作為亞洲的國際商業中心，並擔當國際橋樑的角色，把本港商界與中國和世界各地接連起來。 The Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce is the oldest - founded in 1861 - and largest - around 4,000 corporate members business organization in Hong Kong. As the premier business association, our mission is to promote, safeguard and represent the interests of the local business community. We are the only local business chamber in Hong Kong that is international, and the only international business chamber that is also local, with membership comprising multinational companies, Chinese mainland companies, and Hong Kong companies. HKGCC is a self-funded, non-profit making organization, and as such, it is a truly independent body representing the diverse interests of the entire business community in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR). Over the past year, we made a tremendous effort in assisting members during the distressful period of SARS. Also, we had been doing a lot of work pushing forward the Mainland/Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA)--a Chamber suggestion as early as four years ago--that was successfully signed in June. To help members learn more about CEPA, the Chamber has produced a much-acclaimed CEPA report which provides a detailed analysis of how CEPA affects various business sectors, in addition to the many workshops and roundtables on CEPA implementation. Our members benefit from our good global and Mainland China connections. With our wealth of expertise on the WTO, Pearl River Delta and CEPA, we assist members in exploring business opportunities and extending their business networks both in China and overseas. Many members appreciate our efforts in informing them on the global economy and China’s rapidly changing business environment, and providing them with networking opportunities with government officials and potential business partners from different parts of the world. Our business matching programs have resulted in many members making business connections. In government policy, we are the most influential Chamber in Hong Kong, thanks to our excellent network with politicians and government officials, and more importantly the top-rate policy advice we render to the government on various economic and business policies. These include our two main annual submissions to the government on the Policy Address and the Budget, as well as regular communications throughout the year on policies affecting education, Mainland professional talent, the environment, protection of intellectual property, and business fees and charges, to mention just a few. In addition, the Chamber’s representatives sit on no fewer than forty government committees and public bodies. The Chamber regularly organizes various functions to build fellowship among members, such as the dinner club, monthly happy hour and golf events. These all help expand our members’ business network. HKGCC is a leading voice in promoting Hong Kong as an international business center in the heart of Asia. It acts as an international bridge, connecting Hong Kong business with the Chinese mainland and the rest of the world.

129

香港民主促進會

Hong Kong Democratic Foundation

Tel: (852) 2869-6443 Fax: (852) 2869-6318 www.hkdf.org

香港民主促進會（簡稱 HKDF）於 1989 年成立，是一個由一群本地人士組成的獨立、多種族、多元文化的政治智囊團，致力發展和改善政府政策，使香港成為一個更開放和進步的社會，使所有人能分享香港發展的成果。因此，香港民主促進會的重點在研究和推動政策。

我們的主要活動是探索影響香港的經濟、政治和社會的問題；跟據我們的政策和原則，發表有關問題的政策論文。我們會將我們的政策論文交到適當的政府部門，回應他們的諮詢文件；並且轉達至立法會議員、政黨和其他感興趣的組織。我們亦同時積極遊說有關方面，以達成我們的理想。

在每月的午餐例會我們會就政策議題，邀請著名的嘉賓發表演說，同時，我們會晤專家、立法會議員和有關機構交流意見和發表我們的建議。

香港民主促進會由常務委員會監察，而政策委員會則負責研究。政策委員會每月均舉行一次會議討論計策、檢討政策定位。

會員資格公開予任何人士。

The Hong Kong Democratic Foundation (HKDF) was established in 1989 and is an independent, multi-racial, multi-cultural political think tank made up of local people committed to shaping government policy in order to make Hong Kong a more open, progressive society in which all people can share the fruits of its success. To this end, the HKDF focuses on the development and promotion of policies.

Our primary activity is to seek to influence Hong Kong’s economic, political and social development in accordance with the above. This we aim to accomplish through the production of position papers on relevant topics: developed within the framework of our policies and principles. Our papers are forwarded to appropriate Government Departments, often in response to their consultative documents; circulated to legislators and shared with political parties and other interested organisations. We also lobby actively for the furtherance of our ideals.

We hold monthly luncheons addressed by distinguished guest speakers on topics of interest to our members and useful for our policy development. Additionally, we convene meetings with experts, legislators and organisations for the exchange of ideas and the promotion of our own proposals.

The HKDF is governed by a General Committee, but our principal organ of policy development is our Policy Committee, which meets once a month to discuss ideas, commission and review position papers.

Membership is open to anyone.

130

九龍總商會

The Kowloon Chamber of Commerce

TEL: (852) 2760-0393 FAX: (852) 2761-0166 http://www.hkkcc.org.hk

九龍總商會創自一九三八年，初名旺角商會。尋又改為旺角商業總會，假上海街五零四號三樓辦事。一九三九年會員大增，九龍各區商民均踴躍參加。乃改名為九龍商業總會。採用執監委員制。於該年十二月廿八日舉行第一屆職員就職典禮，嗣後每屆均以是日為創會紀念日。

一九四五年香港重光後，本會即於九月十二日復會。及後會務蒸蒸日上，乃擴大組織。改組為九龍總商會，以符名實。遷往太子道一二二號二樓作為復興會所。公推已故理事長謝伯昌先生任第三屆理事長。至一九五零年購置自由道二號洋房為永久會址，為本會展開燦爛之新頁。光復初期，一九五一年因學校缺少，乃興辦英文中學。一九五六年繼辦中文小學暨幼稚園，為擴充會址及發展會務，將自由道原址拆卸，改建成一幢廿八層高之大廈，一九八四年九月完成。

本會素以促進社會群體利益，致力於工商業之團結互助，以謀本港之經濟發展及社會繁榮，由是聲譽日隆，海外各地之商務機構多與本會聯絡，而本會亦經常派員往各地考察工商業。一九五四年本會參加國際商會為會員而躋身於世界性商業機構之一，並改組為有限公司。本會乃一非牟利團體，並得當時之香港總督葛量洪爵士特別批准免用有限公司四字於會名之下。

本會現有會員兩千餘家商號，另有團體會員卅九個，會員包括各行各業，如紡織業、成衣業、電子業、塑膠業、玩具業、電器業、五金業、旅遊業、建築業、金融業、保險業、運輸業、珠寶業、食品業、飲食業、鐘錶業、紙業、化工業、皮具業、機器業、鐵工業、電鍍業、航業、傢俬業、裝修業、娛樂業、棉業、木業、藤業、醫藥業、農業、水產業、顧繡業、洗染業、柴炭業、礦業、陶瓷業、手工藝業、文化業、百貨業、房地產、會計師及律師等。

經常會務有：協助會員簽發商品來源証明及其他有關商務証明文件等；答覆海外商業詢問信件，為會員提供貿易機會；為會員提供各地商展消息；協助會員開拓海外市場等。

本會現為「亞太商工總會」會員，多年來與亞太區各國之商業組織聯手，共同致力於貿易合作及開拓市場，促進亞太區的經濟繁榮。

本會對於推動社會公益亦不遺餘力，除定期捐款予本港各大慈善機構外，每年並捐出獎助學金予本港各大學與大專，希望藉此能夠作育英才，為工商界培養優秀的下一代，對社會作出更大的貢獻。

The Kowloon Chamber of Commerce was first established in 1938 under the name of Mongkok Chamber of Commerce. In 1939 with the increase in membership, and the need for organized effort in trade promotion, the Chamber was officially inaugurated on 28th December in the same year.

From 1941-1945, the Chamber became dormant, on account of World War II. After the war in 1945, the Association resumed its normal operation. Subsequently, in order to meet the need of ever-growing commercial activities, the Chamber changed its name from Mongkok Chamber of Commerce to Kowloon Chamber of Commerce, with its official premises at No.122, Prince Edward Road and Mr. Robert

131

Der as the chairman.

In1950 the Chamber purchased the premises at No.2, Liberty Avenue, forming the permanent center of commercial activity. At present the Chamber has a membership of over 2000 in addition to 40 association members. In order to provide better services to our members and to meet the need for international contacts, the old premises were demolished to give way to a new building on the same site. The building operation began in March, 1982, and the new 28-storey building was completed in Sept. 1984-a milestone in the progress of KCC.

132

香港電台

Radio Television Hong Kong

TEL: (852) 2339-6300 FAX: (852) 2336-9314 http://www.rthk.org.hk

香港電台是香港唯一的公營廣播機構，自 1928 年啟播以來，即以服務香港社群為首要職責，是亞洲地區歷史最悠久的廣播機構之一。時至今日，香港電台的服務範圍，涵蓋電台廣播、電視製作及互聯網絡。奉行編輯自主，堅持提供製作多元化、富特色、高質素，以及未受商營廣播機構重視的粵語、英語和普通話節目，全面照顧各階層需要。

香港電台首要任務是在新聞、時事、藝術、文化和教育方面，服務廣大聽眾和觀眾，並照顧小眾興趣人士需要。

緊貼時代發展脈搏，香港電台會不時舉辦大型論壇及研討會，探討公眾關心的議題；譬如就政制發展方面，香港電台剛與香港大學合辦《2007 政制研討會》。鼓勵百花齊放，互相交流，尋求共識的討論。在 1987 年舉辦的《代議政制發展檢討綠皮書研討會》，廣邀六十多位社會人士出席，以「馬拉松」式討論香港政制發展；九十年代，又邀得內地的基本法起草委員來港參加基本法研討會。這些討論，對香港政制發展起了深化的作用。

作為公營廣播機構，香港電台將以提供自由表達意見渠道、協力推動香港多元開放文化為己任。

Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) is the sole public broadcaster in Hong Kong; first launched its radio broadcasts in 1928 and is one of the oldest broadcasting institutions in Asia. RTHK has always been in the vanguard of new technologies and became the first Hong Kong broadcaster to go online.

It was one of the first in Asia to conduct trials of real-audio and real-video for multi-media application.

RTHK continually strives for excellence in all areas of its programming. It is proud of its reputation as an editorially independent public broadcaster, and provides a broad range of high quality programmes in Cantonese, English and Putonghua.

As the sole public broadcaster in Hong Kong, RTHK’s primary obligation is to serve all audiences - including special interest groups - by providing diversified radio, television and internet services that are distinctive and of high quality, in news and current affairs, arts, culture and education.

RTHK organizes forums and seminars to discuss issues that arouse public concern. Co-organized with University of Hong Kong, RTHK conducted “Seminar on 2007 Constitutional Review” in January 2004. In the 80’s and 90’s, similar symposiums to exchange views and opinions on Hong Kong’s future were organized by RTHK.

RTHK pledges to deliver programming that contributes to the openness and cultural diversity of Hong Kong, and to provide a platform for free and unfettered expression of views.

133

商業電台

Commercial Radio Hong Kong

TEL: (852) 2336-5111 FAX: (852) 2338-4247 http://www.881903.com

商業電台自一九五九年首播以來，一直備受聽眾歡迎，在資訊、時事和娛樂三方面為香港市民提供多元化而豐富的廣播節目。

商業電台設有兩個粵語廣播頻道 (雷霆 881 商業一台及叱咤 903 商業二台) 和一個英語廣播頻道 (AM864)，每天二十四小時不停廣播。雷霆 881 商業一台為全港聽眾人數最多的電台，主要聽眾年齡為二十五至四十四歲，層面遍及社會各階層，以播放資訊、時事和娛樂節目為主。叱咤 903 商業二台是二十四小時以音樂為主的年青人頻道，主要聽眾年齡為十五至二十四歲，節目路線以輕鬆、活潑及創意為主。AM864 以精心挑選的國際熱門流行曲為主，配合時尚的廣播模式為本地聽眾帶來前所未有的音樂感受。而商業電台製作的新聞及公共事務節目，掌握時代脈搏，為聽眾提供詳盡而準確的新聞節目。

商業電台由一九九五年開始設立電台的官方網站，乃亞洲首個透過互聯網即時廣播之電台，881903.com 旨在打破地域界限，讓世界各地聽眾同步收聽雷霆 881 及叱咤 903 之廣播。

Commercial Radio was inaugurated on August 26th, 1959 and currently operates three services: two Chinese on the FM band and one English on the AM band.

Commercial Radio has always striven for excellence and the provision of the best entertainment possible for the people of Hong Kong. Its three channels have distinct programme formats and listening audiences. CR1, the most listened to radio channel in Hong Kong, is a broad-based channel, placing great emphasis on news, current affairs, talk and phone-in shows, analysis and debate, as well as dramas and talk shows. Its audience is primarily the 25-44 age group, belonging to different social levels. CR2 is a music-based youth channel. Its audience is primarily the 15-24 age group and its programming is centred around personality DJ‘s and the latest in Chinese language pop music. AM864 is an English-language, international-standard music station. It features the very latest in pop and new releases in a hot-sounding Contemporary Radio format unparalleled in Hong Kong. Moreover, Commercial Radio places strong emphasis on news and public affairs, with round the clock news, weather and traffic reports.

CR launched its web activities, 881903.com, as far back as 1995 and was the first radio station in Asia to retransmit its signal over the internet. Since that time, its web presence has gone from strength to strength. The Internet has arrived with a new spectrum of opportunities creating an innovative and exciting medium to reach more and wider audience globally.

134

明

報 Ming Pao

Tel: (852) 2595-3111 Fax: (852) 2898-3783 www.mingpaonews.com

背景

《明報》於 1959 年 5 月 20 日創刊，致力對香港及中國的政經大事作全面、客觀及不偏不倚的報道與分析，並長期堅持此編輯方針，

因而成為全港最具公信力的中文傳媒 ── 據香港中文大學於 2001 年公布的傳媒公信力調查結果顯示，《明報》壓倒了所有中英文報章及電子媒體，獲公眾選為最具公信力的媒體。

此外，《明報》連續十二年在香港報業公會主辦的「香港最佳新聞獎」中贏得多個獎項。這些獎項，反映明報的報道及印刷水準獲得業界人士的認同。

《明報》同仁深信報章是社會公器，因此致力為讀者提供最具公信力的資訊，維護公義，為社會繁榮進步作出貢獻。這辦報方針贏得五十五萬讀者支持，他們大多是中產階層，學歷、收入等遠較香港平均水平為高，並多為專業人士、管理層人員、企業的決策者，屬社會的中流砥柱。

Background

Founded in 1959, Ming Pao has become one of the leading newspapers in Hong Kong. Our consistency and

persistency in the distinct quality of the professional editorial standard has gained high respect among readers and in the market.

Characterized by professional, credible and incisive news reporting, Ming Pao has enjoyed its renowned reputation as the most credible media in Hong Kong. The survey conducted by The Chinese University of Hong Kong in the year 2001 revealed that Ming Pao was the most credible media, among all Chinese and English print media as well as other electronic media in Hong Kong.

Besides, Ming Pao has won a number of awards from the Hong Kong News Awards organized by The Newspaper Society of Hong Kong for the past twelve years for our editorial and photography excellence.

The pen is mightier than the sword. Ming Pao commits to providing the most credible news and quality information to its 550,000 readers who are corporate executives, senior management and intellectuals in Hong Kong, with an affluent and prominent status.

135

南華早報出版有限公司

South China Morning Post Publishers Limited Tel: (852) 2565-2333 Fax: (852) 2811-1048 www.scmp.com

背景

南華早報出版有限公司為《南華早報》及《星期日南華早報》之出版商。該兩份報章分別為亞洲英文日報及星期日報章之翹楚，

銷量高踞香港英文報章首位。

根據二零零二年 ACNielsen RARD 報告指出，《南華早報》在香港英文報章讀者市場的佔有率愈 96%。其時事評論文章在大中華地區具領導地位，廣為全球之政要、商家、專業人士及學者所閱讀。它亦為商業及招聘廣告之市場領導者。

其網上版─SCMP.com 屢獲獎項，透過其收費訂購服務，全球讀者可隨時閱覽本報報導、定時更新的新聞內容及網站資訊，此外更可下載新聞內容至 PDA。

《南華早報》的編採、市場推廣能力及卓越技術一直被受肯定。其最近榮獲 PANPA(Pacific Area Newspaper Publisher's Association 頒發 2003 年的超卓技術獎，及 DM Asia 頒發的多媒體類別銀獎，此為區域性市場推廣獎項。二零零二年所獲獎項包括最佳新聞報導、最佳新聞寫作(英文組)、最佳經濟新聞寫作(英文組)、最佳標題(英文組)、最佳圖片及由(PANPA)頒發的超卓技術獎。

首份《南華早報》於一九零三年十一月面世，故公司將於今年十一月慶祝其一百週年，並已安排一連串紀念活動，項目包括百週年紀念圖片冊、一百張有收藏價值的明信片、圖片展覽、賽馬日及一系列特稿。

南華早報出版有限公司為 SCMP 集團有限公司之全資附屬公司。透過其他附屬公司，SCMP 集團有限公司亦從事雜誌出版業務、零售、商業錄象製作，以及投資。SCMP 集團之股份在香港聯合交易所有限公司上市。

Background

The company publishes the South China Morning Post and the Sunday Morning Post, Asia’s premier English

language daily and Sunday newspapers with the highest circulation of any English language newspaper in Hong Kong.

The South China Morning Post is a leading commentator on Greater China and is widely read by government officials, business people, professionals and academics. According to the ACNielsen RARD Report 2002, the South China Morning Post has over 96% of the English language newspaper readership in Hong Kong. It is also the market leader for display and recruitment advertising in Hong Kong.

Its Internet edition, SCMP.com, is an award-winning subscription-based website which offers a global audience access to the editorial content of the print edition, breaking news updates throughout the day, e-newsletters and news on PDA.

The South China Morning Post receives constant recognition for its editorial, marketing efforts and technical capability.

It has just won

the 2003 Technical Excellence Award from PANPA (Pacific Area Newspaper Publishers’ Association) and a coveted Silver in multimedia for the DM Asia awards, a regional marketing award. Awards won in 2002 included the Newspaper of The Year Awards for Best News Reporting, Best News Writing (English), Best Business News Writing (English), Best Headline (English), Best Photograph and the award for technical excellence from PANPA.

136

To celebrate its centenary, the South China Morning Post has arranged a series of memorable programmes in the run-up to November, the month when the paper first went to press in 1903. Projects include a centenary book, a collectors set of 100 postcards, an exhibition, a race meeting and a series of special editorial products.

South China Morning Post Publishers Limited is a wholly-owned subsidiary of SCMP Group Limited. Through other subsidiaries, SCMP Group Limited is also involved in the publication of magazines, retailing, commercial and business video production and property investments. SCMP Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shares are listed on The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited.

137

香港文匯報

Wen Wei Po

TEL: (852) 2873-8288 FAX: (852) 2870-3515 http://www.wenweipo.com

簡介

香港文匯報創刊於一九四八年九月九日。它是上海文匯報同人與在香港的愛國民主人士一起創辦的。作為一份愛國愛港、根植

香港、面向港人、進入內地、行銷國內外的綜合性報紙，香港文匯報始終客觀、公正地報道香港的政治、經濟、民生、教育、文化以及突發性社會新聞。

香港回歸以後，香港文匯報積極報道香港特別行政區政府在中央政府的支援下，按照基本法的規定正確行使職權，認真落實“一國兩制”、 “港人治港”和高度自治的方針。

目前香港文匯報在全國三十一個主要城市設有辦事處、記者站、聯絡處，形成一個覆蓋全國各地的新聞網絡。報紙主要在香港發行，平均每日出紙達五十二版以上，除在香港、澳門發行外，並即日運銷中國內地各大城市。另外，通過出版海外版，香港文匯報讀者已遍及世界一百多個國家和地區。

香港文匯報除設有印務部、紙業部、物業發展部、公關策劃部等兼營專項業務的部門外，還擁有雅典美術印製公司、文匯貿易服務有限公司、文匯出版社有限公司、駿發置業有限公司、華匯廣告公司、興圖有限公司等全資附屬公司，正逐步向集團化企業方向發展。

特點

香港文匯報是獲香港特區政府指定刊登有關法律性質廣告的有效刊物，同時又是可在中國內地發行的香港報紙。它既是香港工

商、金融、企業、旅遊界向內地市場推廣產品與服務的媒介，又是內地工商、金融、企業各界向香港及世界各地招商引資、拓展貿易的橋樑。香港文匯報並持有中國國家工商行政管理局核發的《廣告經營許可證》，是極少數獲准直接在中國內地承攬廣告業務的香港報刊之一。

Profile

Wen Wei Po was launched in Hong Kong on September 9, 1948, by a group of journalists from the Shanghai-based Wen

Hui Bao in joint efforts with Hong Kong patriots.

Wen Wei Po, a patriotic newspaper, provides the most up-to-date and accurate source of news and information on government policies, developments in political, economic and social and cultural activities on the Chinese mainland, for the vast reading public in Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and other parts of the world. It gives a comprehensive coverage and a fair view of local news events, the varied and colorful world events and achievements in modern science and technology.

In the years that followed the handover, Wen Wei Po lent its effort to the coverage of the implementation by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, of the policies of "one country, two systems", "Hong Kong people administrating Hong Kong" and high degree of autonomy.

Nowadays, The newspaper has representative offices and correspondents in 31 mainland cities to give coverage of political, economic and social events in Mainland China. The paper is mainly distributed in Hong Kong and publishes an average of over 52 pages. It is available in Hong Kong, Macao and major cities on the Chinese mainland. Thanks to its overseas editions, the newspaper enjoys a

138

worldwide readership that covers more than 100 countries and regions.

As a Hong Kong-based newspaper, Wen Wei Po is developing into an enterprise group with diversified business. Apart from running the daily newspaper, it had the press department, paper business department, property & development department and public relations department to carry out their own commercial business respectively. The daily paper also operates six fully owned subsidiaries.

Characters Authorized by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the paper is carrier of legal-service advertisement. It is one of the few Hong Kong-based newspapers that are both allow to be distributed on the Chinese mainland and authorized by the China State Administration of Industry and Commerce to handle advertising business on the mainland.

Hence you may say the newspaper is now the best choice of all Hong Kong-based media for local business, including commercial, financial and tourist enterprises to promote their products and services on the mainland. Of course the newspaper also serves as a tool for the business in Mainland China to help develop international trade, raise capital and seek for partners in Hong Kong and other places of the world.

139

何永謙

先生

香港政策研究所行政總裁

簡

歷

何永謙先生於 2003 年 10 月加入香港政策研究所，擔任行政總栽一職。在加入香港政策研究所之前，他是香港特區政府的一名高級公務員，在離開政府時任職康樂及文化事務署副署長。

何永謙先生擁有豐富的公共行政經驗，在社會福利（老人福利和社會保障）、土地及房屋政策和選舉及地方行政事務幾方面尤其熟悉。在 1996 至 2002 年間，何先生出任衛生及福利局副局長，主導安老政策的全面檢討。他曾兩度任職房屋署，負責多項房屋政策檢討工作。並協助監察「公共房屋發展計劃」的執行，以達至各項房屋目標。另外，他曾兩度調職民政事務局 /署，作為副理民府，負責前線地區行政工作，包括負起管理區議會的政治工作。出任首席助理民政司時，負責推動地區行政計劃，包括檢討區議會的議席，委任制度等。

出任香港政策研究所總裁後，何永謙先生經常為國內高級公務員講解香港的公共行政和財務管理。自此以後，他一直與各地智囊、知識份子和研究員保持聯繫，就中國內地、香港和台灣未來發展的重要課題交換意見。

何永謙先生畢業於香港中文大學，獲頒一級榮譽社會科學學位。取得學位後，他獲頒獎學金到加洲大學修讀城市規劃碩士。之後，他獲獎學金到聯合國房屋、建設及規劃中心擔任暑期實習生，並於完成實習計劃後在該中心留任一年，直至一九七八年夏季，返回香港並加入政府工作。

140

Mr. Laurence W. H. Ho

Chief Executive Hong Kong Policy Research Institute Biography

Mr. Ho Wing Him has been the chief Executive of the Hong Kong Policy Research Institute (HKPRI) since October 2003. He was formerly a senior civil servant and was Deputy Director of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department before he left the Government. He has extensive experience in public administration, particularly in the areas of social welfare (elderly services and social security), land and housing policies, electoral and district administration policies and matters.

He played a key

role in the review of the entire range of elderly services when he was Deputy Secretary for Health and Welfare between 1996 and 2001.

He was posted to the Housing Department twice.

On both occasions, he was a key member of various

internal policy groups and made significant contribution to the review of a wide range of housing policies.

He also

helped to keep under review the Public Housing Development Program to ensure achievement of the various housing targets.

He worked in the Home Affairs Bureau/Department twice and was responsible for the implementation of the

District Administration Scheme.

As an Assistant District Officer, he was responsible for front-line district administration

work, including carrying the political responsibilities of management of a District Board.

As a Principal Assistant

Secretary, he was responsible for the review of the composition of District Boards (appointment system) and various other aspects of the district administration scheme. After leaving the Government, Mr. Ho has been invited to give lectures to senior civil servants of the Governments of various provinces/cities in the Mainland in relation to the public administration and financial management of the Hong Kong Government.

He has since been active in maintaining liaison with various

think-tanks, academics, and researchers in the Mainland to exchange views on matters of importance to the future development of the Mainland, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Mr. Ho graduated from the Chinese University of Hong Kong with First Class Honor in Social Science and was awarded a scholarship to study at the University of California at Berkeley where he earned a Master Degree in Urban Planning. He was then awarded a scholarship to travel to the United Nations to work as a summer intern at the Centre for Housing, Building and Planning. He was subsequently awarded a consultancy contract and remained with the United Nations until the following summer, when he returned to Hong Kong to join the Government.

141

張炳良

教授

Professor Anthony B. L. Cheung

香港城市大學公共及社會行政學系教授 Department of Public and Social Administration City University of Hong Kong

簡

歷

Biography

Professor Anthony B. L. Cheung, BBS, JP is Professor of the Department of Public and Social Administration, City University of Hong Kong. He is Chairman of the policy think-tank SynergyNet and a founding director of the Hong Kong Policy Research Institute. Formerly a Member of the Legislative Council and the Housing Authority, he currently sits on several government advisory bodies. During 1994-98, he was the vice-chairman of the Democratic Party.

Professor Cheung is an ex-civil servant and received his PhD degree in Government from the London School of Economics and Political Science. He specializes in research on civil service system, Asian administrative reforms and government and politics in Hong Kong and China.

張炳良教授，香港城市大學公共及社會行政學系教授。為民間智庫「新力量網絡」主席、及香港政策研究所創會董事。曾任香港立法局議員及房屋委員會委員，現任多個政府諮詢組織成員。1994 至 98 年為民主黨副主席。張炳良教授曾任公務員，獲英國倫敦經濟及政治學院哲學博士，專研公務員制度、亞洲地區公共管理改革、及香港與中國政治發展。

142

蔣麗莉

博士

Dr. Lily Chiang 香港總商會副主席 Vice Chairman Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce

簡

歷

Biography

蔣麗莉博士在 1999 年榮獲香港十大傑出青年，2001 年獲選科技界傑出女士，2003 年給評選為中國未來經濟領袖。她亦是美國南加州大學及香港理工大學之傑出校友。蔣博士致力於社會服務，現任香港總商會副主席、可持續發展委員會委員、珠三角研究小組成員、醫院管理局董事局成員及山東省政協委員。學術方面，蔣博士除擔任香港大學教研發展基金創會遴選會員外，亦是香港理工大學製造工程系客座教授及美國柏克萊大學亞洲領袖會議名譽委員會委員。她亦是本港各間大學學術委員會成員，並於多間有名之大學擔任榮譽及客座教授。

Dr. Lily Chiang was one of the Ten Outstanding Young Persons in Hong Kong in 1999. She was also named one of the Distinguished Women of Hong Kong 2001 in the High Technology Sector and selected to be China’s Economic Leaders for Tomorrow 2003. In addition, she received the Alumni Merit Award presented by the General Alumni Association of the University of Southern California. To contribute to our community, Dr. Chiang is Vice-Chairman of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce and a member of the Council for Sustainable Development, CPU Panel on the Pearl River Delta, Hospital Authority and Shandong Provincial People’s Political Consultative Conference. In the academic sector, Dr. Chiang is a Founding Voting Member of the Foundation for Education Development and Research at the University of Hong Kong, Visiting Professor at the Department of Manufacturing Engineering of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and member of the Honorary Committee of UC Berkeley’s Asian Leadership Conference. Besides, Dr. Chiang is also member of many other academic committees of the universities in Hong Kong and the Honorary and Visiting Professor at various famous universities.

143

李鵬飛

先生

時事評論員簡

學歷及專業資格

：密西根大學理學士（工程數學）

出生日期

：1940 年 4 月 24 日

出生地點

：中國山東省煙台市

主要職銜

：華經顧問有限公司主席

歷

積德電子有限公司主席獎項：年份香港十大傑出青年

1977

太平紳士

1980

英女皇頒發 OBE(英帝國官佐)勳章

1982

英女皇頒發 CBE(英帝國司令)勳章

1988

榮譽工程博士學位（理工學院）

1990 年 6 月

榮譽法學博士學位（香港中文大學）

1990 年 10 月

名譽資深會員 (香港工程師學會)

1990

名譽會員 (Beta Gamma Sigma 香港中文大學分會)

2000 年 3 月 18 日

兼任教授香港中文大學管理學系

2000 年 9 月 1 日至 2005 年 1 月 31 日

政治成就：第九及第十屆全國人大代表-香港特別行政區代表

1997 年 12 月-目前

香港特別行政區臨時立法會議員

1997 - 1998

香港立法局議員

1978 - 1997

香港行政局議員

1985 - 1992

首席立法局議員

1988 - 1991

啟聯資源召集人

1992

自由黨主席

1993 – 1998 年 12 月

港事顧問

1993 年 4 月

香港特別行政區籌備委員會委員

1996 年 1 月

香港特別行政區推選委員會委員

1996 年 11 月

144

Mr. Lee Peng Fei, Allen

Commentator Biography

Date of Birth

24th April 1940

Place of Birth

Yantai, Shantung, China

Education

B.S. (Engineering Mathematics) University of Michigan, U.S.A.

Principal Occupation

Chairman, Pacific Dimensions Consultants Limited Chairman, Jada Electronics Limited

Awards:

Year

Outstanding Young Persons Award

1977

Justice of Peace

1980

OBE

1982

CBE

1988

Hon. Doctor of Engineering (Hong Kong Polytechnic)

June 1990

Hon. Doctor of Laws (Chinese University of Hong Kong)

October 1990

Honorary Fellow, Hong Kong Institution of Engineers

1990

Chapter Honoree Award, the Chinese University of Hong Kong

18 March 2000

Chapter Of Beta Gamma Sigma Adjunct Professor, Department of Management,

September 2000

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

- January 2005

Political Achievement: Deputy, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region,

December 97-Todate

The 9th & 10th National Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s Congress, PRC Member of Provisional Legislative Council, HK SAR Government

1997-1998

Member of Legislative Council, Hong Kong Government

1978-1997

Member of Executive Council, Hong Kong Government

1985-1992

Senior Member of Legislative Council, Hong Kong Government

1988-1991

Convenor, Co-operative Resources Centre (CRC)

1992

Chairman, Liberal Party of Hong Kong

1993-1998

Public Service: Member, Court of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University Member, Advisory Board, Hong Kong Red Cross 145

Appointed by PRC: Hong Kong Affairs Adviser

April 1993

Member, Preparatory Committee

January 1996

Member, Selection Committee

November 1996

146

梁國輝

博士

Dr. Thomas K.F. Leung 香港發展論壇召集人 Co-Convenor Hong Kong Development Forum

簡

歷

Biography

教育及職業資格梁博士是一位著名的組織與人力資源管理方面的專家，其具有 20 年的香港政府政策，大企業集團及跨國公司的咨詢與顧問工作方面的非凡經驗，他畢業于美國伊利諾大學工商管理學系並獲得博士學位。梁國輝博士在 1995 年創辦泓略公司前，曾擔任世界最傑出的管理顧問公司之一－曦士集團 (Hay Group）的亞太區行政總裁。公眾服務方面梁博士現任香港教育學院校董會主席；香港政府首長級薪俸及服務條件常務委員會成員；香港立法及行政兩局薪津委員會成員；大律師紀律審裁團成員。他曾於 1996 至 1997 年服務於本港政府中央政策組，且自 1994 至 2003 年為本港政府的公務員敘用委員會成員之一，他曾是大學改革督導委員會成員，亦曾任香港科技大學及浸會大學校董會成員。梁博士於 1996 年被授予本港太平紳士尊銜。

Educational/Professional Qualifications Thomas is a leading organization and human resource expert, with a distinguished career in consulting and advising the HK Government, major Asian conglomerates and multinationals in the last twenty years. He holds a Ph.D. degree in Business Administration from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. He was a worldwide senior partner and Chief Executive-Asia of the Hay Group, the world’s leading human resource consulting firm, before founding Vision in Business in 1995.

Public Service Thomas is an appointed Justice of the Peace in Hong Kong. He served on the Central Policy Unit from 1996-97 and the Public Service Commission of the HKSAR Government from 1994-2003. He was a member of the UGC (University Grants Committee) Steering Committee on Higher Education Review and a Council Member of the University of Science and Technology and the Hong Kong Baptist University.

Currently, Thomas is the Chairman of the Institute of Education

Council, as well as a member of the Independent Commission on Remuneration for Members of the Executive Council and the Legislature of the Hong Kong SAR; the Standing Committee on Directorate Salaries and Conditions of Service; the Steering Committee on Civil Service Pay Adjustment Mechanism, and the Barristers Disciplinary Tribunal Panel.

147

李彭廣

博士

Dr. Li Pang Kwong 嶺南大學政治學及社會學系副教授兼公共管治研究部主任 Associate Professor Department of Politics and Sociology, Lingnan University, and

Director of Public Governance Programme 簡

歷

Biography

李彭廣，英國倫敦大學倫敦政治經濟學院哲學博士，現任嶺南大學政治學及社會學系副教授兼公共管治研究部主任。主要研究範疇包括：投票行為與選舉政治、議會研究、治理與制度設計、政策制訂和公共選擇。已出版的著作包括：Hong Kong from Britain to China: Political Cleavages, Electoral Dynamics and Institutional Changes (Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2000)、Political Order and Power Transition in Hong Kong. Ed. (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1997)；已發表的論文則散見於選舉研

究、Asian Perspective、China Report，及其他學術論文專書內。除教學和研究外，他亦常在媒體評論香港政情和主持電台的時事討論節目。

Li Pang-kwong received his Ph.D. from the London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London. He is Associate Professor in the Department of Politics and Sociology and concurrently the founding Director of the Public Governance Programme at Lingnan University. His major research areas include: voting behaviour and electoral politics, legislative studies, governance and institutional design, policy-making and public choice. His publications include: Hong Kong from Britain to China: Political Cleavages, Electoral Dynamics and Institutional Changes (Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2000); Political Order and Power Transition in Hong Kong. Ed. (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1997); and articles appeared in Electoral Studies (選舉研究), Asian Perspective, China Report, and in various academic books. Beside teaching and research, he is often interviewed by media on Hong Kong politics and has co-hosted a phone-in radio programme.

148

陸恭蕙

女士

思匯政策研究所行政總監簡

歷

陸恭蕙現為獨立非牟利智囊組織思匯政策研究所之行政總監，也是研究所的其中一位創辦人。

成立思匯政策研究所前，陸恭蕙曾活躍於政壇達八年。一九九二年，她被委任為立法局議員，其後分別參加一九九五年及一九九八年之立法局/會直選，並成功勝出連任。在政壇的日子，陸恭蕙成功爭取多項改革，如：《防止賄賂條例》、《公開資料守則》、新界婦女繼承權、平等機會法例以及《保護海港條例》。

陸恭蕙未涉足政壇前，曾在商界工作十四年。她曾於美國跨國公司 Salomon Inc（即現時 Salomon Smith Barney）旗下的 Philipp Brothers 及 Phibro Energy 任期貨交易員，並負責策略性規劃工作。陸恭蕙是一九八零年首批被派駐北京工作的商人，她協助 Philipp Brothers 於北京開設首個美國駐京辦事處。一九九二年，她協助智才集團參與九號貨櫃碼頭的經營權投標工作，還將 LoFt 這有名的日本品牌引進香港。

陸恭蕙常就政治、政經、可持續發展、企業社會責任等範疇廣泛撰文，文章曾刊登於本地及海外雜誌或學術期刊。她經常出席商界或其他公開論壇擔任講者。陸恭蕙畢業於英國赫爾大學，取得英國法律學學士學位，其後於香港城市大學取得中國及比較法學碩士學位。她更得到母校赫爾大學頒發榮譽法學博士學位。

陸恭蕙現為香港科技大學校董會成員、美國 Rocky Mountain Institute 的理事會成員、香港證券及期貨事務監察委員會諮詢委員會成員、香港亞洲可持續發展投資協會董事（中國香港）及美國亞洲協會之國際諮詢小組成員。陸恭蕙是其中一位世界經濟論壇的全球年青領袖。她更奪得多個奬項，當中包括一九九八年及二零零零年被商業周刊選為「亞洲之星」。

149

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” Strengthening Government Leadership y Hong Kong

Enhancing Government-People Relations

8 May 2004

Saturday

Ms. Christine Loh

Chief Executive officer Civic Exchange Biography

Christine Loh is the co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of the independent, non-profit public policy think tank, Civic Exchange. Prior to the establishment of Civic Exchange, Loh had a highly successful career in politics. She was appointed to the Hong Kong Legislative Council in 1992 and then ran two successful elections in 1995 and 1998. As a politician, she championed many issues, which included the successful reform of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, access to information, rural inheritance rights, equal opportunity legislation and passed the groundbreaking Protection of the Harbour Ordinance. Prior to her career in politics, Loh had a successful 14-year career in the private commercial sector. She was engaged in commodities trading and strategic planning for Philipp Brothers, and Phibro Energy, divisions of the US multinational Salomon Inc [now Salomon Smith Barney]. She was among the first group of business people to be posted to work in Beijing in 1980 and helped set-up the first US representative office for Philipp Brothers there. In 1992, she helped the Hong Kong-based CIM Company Ltd put together an international consortium to bid for the development of Hong Kong Container Terminal No. 9, and also brought the famous LoFt retail licence from Japan to Hong Kong. Loh writes extensively about politics, political economy, sustainable development, and corporate social responsibility, and has been widely published in Hong Kong and abroad in both mass circulation and academic publications. She is a frequent speaker at business and public forums. She holds an English law degree from the University of Hull, England, and a Masters of Law degree in Chinese and Comparative Law from the City University of Hong Kong. She has been awarded the degree of Doctor of Law, honoris causa, by the University of Hull. She is a Council Member of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Board Member of the Rocky Mountain Institute (USA), Member of the Advisory Committee of the Securities and Futures Commission, Non-executive Director of the Association for Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia (ASRIA), and Member of Asia Society’s International Council (USA). She is one of the World Economic Forum’s “Global Leaders for Tomorrow”. Christine Loh has won various prizes, including being twice recognised by Business Week as one of ‘The Stars of Asia’ in 1998 and

again in 2000.

150

陳淑薇

女士

Ms. May Chan Suk Mei 香港新聞行政人員協會主席 Chairperson Hong Kong News Executives’ Association

簡

歷

Biography 陳淑薇為香港新聞行政人員協會主席，現任商業電台新聞及公共事務總監。一九七七年畢業於浸會學院傳理系，隨即加入商業電台新聞部任職記者，之後曾擔任翻譯及編輯工作，一九八八年曾在無線電視新聞部任職採訪主任，一九八九年重返商業電台，出任新聞及公共事務總監至今。陳淑薇除負責商業電台新聞及公共事務部的日常運作外，現時亦是商業一台時事節目「政經星期六」及「政好星期天」節目主持人，專訪政府高層及社會精英。陳淑薇任職新聞界二十多年，八十年代初曾到英國修讀新聞廣播課程，九十年代初亦曾往美國多個城市參加美國政府新聞處安排之電台新聞課程，並於二零零一年獲中文大學頒新聞學碩士學位。陳淑薇現時是職業訓練局大眾傳播訓練委員會會員，參與制定新聞訓練培訓工作。多年來擔任香港新聞行政人員協會執行委員，協助籌辦海峽兩岸暨港澳新聞研討會，積極推動四地新聞交流。二零零零年獲香港特別行政區政府頒發銅紫荊星章。

Ms. Chan Suk Mei, May, currently is the Chairperson of Hong Kong News Executives’ Association. She is also the Director of News and Public Affairs Department of Hong Kong Commercial Radio. Soon after her graduation from Communication Department, Hong Kong Baptist College in 1977, she joined Hong Kong Commercial Radio as reporter and translator. She was later promoted to the post of editor. She joined TVB News Department as News Editor in 1988 and rejoined Hong Kong Commercial Radio as Director of News and Public Affairs Department in 1989 till now. Ms. Chan is also the host of two Public Affairs Programs Saturday Forum and Beautiful Sunday of CR1. The two programs are famous for interviewing government officials and celebrities. Ms. Chan has been a veteran journalist for 27 years. She furthered her studies in the journalistic field in Britain, the United States and was awarded MA degree, School of Journalism and Communication, Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2001. Ms. Chan has been a member of the Mass Communications Training Board, Vocational Training Council for many years. She has been the committee member of the Board of Hong Kong News Executives’ Association for many years and helped in promoting the professional exchange among journalists of the Mainland, Taiwan, Macau and Hong Kong. She was also awarded the Bronze Bauhinia Star by the HKSAR government in 2000.

151

余若薇

女士

Ms. Audrey Eu

資深大律師及立法會議員 Senior Counsel & Legislative Council Member

簡

歷

Biography

余若薇在 1975 年畢業於香港大學法律學院，繼而到英國深造，在 1976 年取得倫敦大學法律碩士學位，並於 1977 年考獲英國大律師執業資格。1978 年，余女士獲取香港大律師執業資格，一直執業至今，於 1993 年成為御用大律師（現稱「資深大律師」）。多年來，余女士出任多項公職，對社會服務尤為關注，並在 1994 年獲委任為太平紳士。1997 和 1998 年，余女士出任兩屆香港大律師公會主席。她現為香港立法會議員。

余女士已婚，現育有三名女兒。

Audrey Y.M. Eu obtained her LLB from the Hong Kong University in 1975.

She completed her LLM with the

University of London in 1976 and was called to the Bar in England in 1977. She was admitted as a barrister in Hong Kong in 1978 and has been in practice since then. interested in community services. Counsel).

She has served on various statutory or non-statutory bodies and is

In 1993, she was called to the Inner Bar and became a Queen’s Counsel (now Senior

In 1994, she became a Non-official Justice of the Peace.

Association in 1997 and 1998.

She was the Chairman of Hong Kong Bar

She is currently a member of the Legislative Council.

Ms. Eu is married with 3 daughters.

152

方敏生

女士

香港社會服務聯會行政總裁簡

歷

方敏生女士現為香港社會服務聯會(社聯)行政總裁，社聯為香港志願社會福利服務機構的聯會，有 297 個機構會員，為香港提供九成的社會福利服務。

方女士最初晉身社工專業，從事社區工作，為邊緣社群提供服務，及後進入香港理工學院應用社會科學系擔任講師。在進入社聯工作以前，方女士為香港紅十字會秘書長，透過在前線服務、學院工作以及擔任國際救援組織及政策倡議團體的領導層，方女士在本地及國際社會福利界已累積豐富經驗。

方女士致力發展及推動社會福利，獲邀參與多個重要的政府政策諮詢委員會，包括社會福利諮詢委員會、復康服務委員會、社區投資共享基金委員會、人力發展委員會、可持續發展委員會、愛滋病顧問局、以及嚴重急性呼吸系統綜合症信託基金覆檢委員會等。同時，她亦被邀請擔任醫院管理局臨床倫理學委員會、香港報業評議會會員、香港浸會大學社會工作諮詢委員會委員、香港中文大學社會工作學系諮詢委員會委員、香港大學公民社會與治理研究中心顧問、以及中國社會工作協會名譽顧問。

方女士早年於香港大學主修社會工作，榮獲社會科學學士榮譽學位，後赴笈美國芝加哥大學主修社會政策分析及服務管理，並取得社會服務行政學院碩士學位。

153

Ms. Christine Fang Meng-sang

Chief Executive Hong Kong Council of Social Service Biography

Ms Christine FANG is the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Council of Social Service (HKCSS), an umbrella organization of over 286 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that are providing 90% of the social welfare services in Hong Kong. Ms FANG started her social work career as a community worker working with marginalized communities and then became a lecturer in social work in the Hong Kong Polytechnic School of Applied Social Studies.

Prior to joining

HKCSS, she was the Secretary General of Hong Kong Red Cross, accumulating rich experience in both local and international welfare sectors. Ms FANG also contributes towards the development and promotion of social welfare by means of participating in various government and NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s committees.

In addition to her involvement in social welfare, Ms FANG sits in various

important government policy committees, including Social Welfare Advisory Committee, Rehabilitation Advisory Committee, Community Investment & Inclusion Fund Committee, Manpower Development Committee, Sustainable Development Council, Advisory Council on AIDS, and Review Committee on Trust Fund for SARS.

Ms. FANG also

helps in the work of other NGOs, including Hospital Authority Clinical Ethics Committee; Hong Kong Press Council, Social Work Advisory Committee of the Hong Kong Baptist University, Advisory Committee of Department of Social Work of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Centre for Civil Society and Governance of University of Hong Kong as well as the Hon. Advisor of China Association of Social Workers. Ms FANG holds a Bachelor of Social Science Honours degree in Social Work from the University of Hong Kong, a Master degree in Social Service Administration from the University of Chicago, USA.

154

周八駿

博士

Dr. Zhou Bajun 中國光大集團有限公司高級研究員 Senior Research Fellow China Everbright Holdings Company Limited

簡

歷

Biography 周八駿博士，現任中國光大集團高級研究員及中國光大控股有限公司研究部董事。自 1986 年以來，在香港生活和工作已約 18 年。除數年時間任香港本地一家著名金融集團的中國證券業務主管外，18 年來一直從事關於中國內地和香港的研究，包括在新華社香港分社（即中聯辦前身）研究機構做政策研究和本地若干投資銀行研究部門做金融市場研究。來香港前，在上海社會科學院世界經濟研究所從事關於世界經濟國際金融和中國經濟體制改革的研究。曾以高級訪問學者應邀赴德國和西歐做關於國際經濟一體化和歐洲貨幣體系的研究。周八駿在香港或內地先後發表了 6 本專著或文集，以及數百篇文章，大多關於中國內地和香港的經濟和政治。

Dr. Zhou Bajun is senior research fellow of China Everbright Holdings Company Ltd. and Executive director of China Everbright Research Ltd. He has 18 years working experiences in Hong Kong since 1986 including policies research in Xinhua News Agency Hong Kong Branch and financial markets research in investment bank’s research institutions. He had been a head in charge of China securities market business for a Hong Kong based financial group. Before he lived and worked in Hong Kong, Dr. Zhou had done research work in the Shanghai Academy of Social Science. He had visited Germany and Western European as a senior visiting scholar focusing on research of international economic integration and European Monetary System. Dr. Zhou has written and published 6 books either in Hong Kong or in mainland and hundreds of articles in various newspapers and magazines in Hong Kong, mainland China, Taiwan, Singapore and Malaysia. Most of them concentrated in China and Hong Kong economy and politics.

155

研討會「前車可鑑 – 香港的管治」加強政府的領導星期六

y 強化市民與政府的關係 2004 年 5 月 8 日

香港

葉國華

先生

香港政策研究所主席簡

歷

香港運科集團主席、耀華教育管理有限公司主席、耀中教育機構董事、香港政策研究所主席。肄業於香港浸會學院 (今香港浸會大學 )中文系，專長企業管理、教育、文化，對兩岸三地及國際時局有廣泛而獨到的見解。葉先生的社會公職包括：香港浸會大學校董事會成員、香港青年工業家協會名譽顧問、香港清華聯誼會名譽會長、香港中華文化促進中心名譽會長、中國社會科學院研究生院名譽教授、中國重慶大學客座教授兼港澳臺研究所名譽所長、上海東亞研究所名譽理事長、美國傳統基金亞洲研究中心顧問委員會成員等。 2003 年 5 月被委任為特區政府投資推廣處 “ 振興經濟策略小組 ”成員。

曾任香港事務顧問、香港特別行政區籌備委員會委員及推選委員會委員，由 1997 年 7 月 1 日至 2002 年 6 月 30 日葉先生被委任為香港特別行政區行政長官特別顧問。

156

Conference on “Lessons To Learn: Governing Hong Kong” Strengthening Government Leadership Hong Kong

y Enhancing Government-People Relations

8 May 2004

Saturday

Mr. Paul Yip Kwok-wah

Chairman Hong Kong Policy Research Institute Biography

Chairman of the Renful Group, Chairman of Yew Wah Education Management Co. Ltd., Director of Yew Chung Education Foundation, and Founder and Chairman of the Hong Kong Policy Research Institute. Educated at the Chinese-language Department of Hong Kong Baptist College (now Hong Kong Baptist University), Mr. Yip specializes in business management, education and culture and has a profound understanding of current developments in Mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Mr. Yip’s other public commitments include being Member of the Council of Hong Kong Baptist University; Honorary Advisor to Hong Kong Young Industrialists Council; Honorary President of the Tsing Hua Club of Hong Kong; Honorary Chairman of The Hong Kong Institute for Promotion of Chinese Culture；Honorary Professor of Graduate Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; Chair Professor at Chongqing University and Honorary President of Chongqing University’s Institute of Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan Studies; Honorary Director of the Shanghai Institute for East Asia Studies; Member of the Advisory Council, Asian Studies Center, Heritage Foundation etc. Mr. Yip was also appointed member of the Economic Relaunch Strategy Group in May, 2003 Mr. Yip was appointed Hong Kong Advisor in April 1995. He was also member of the preparatory committee of HKSAR and member of the selection committee of HKSAR. From July 1997 to June 2002, he was appointed Special Adviser to the Chief Executive of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

157