LSESU HKPASS: PASS-On Monthly - October 2015

No. 1 - October 2015

MONTHLY

The online edition.

Sub-committee

Joshua Wong

香港人 你講哂啦！

窮是原罪？

Meet our selected 2015-16 team

Discussion Panel on Democracratisation in HK

Naomi Chan on the Hong Konger’s attitudes

The Freelance Guy on the poverty in HK

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

contents 03 04 06 08 10 16 18 20 21 24 25 26 28 29 32 36 Page 2

Editor’s Note 2015-16 Timeline Last and Next Event Introducing Sub-Committee Panel Discussion Ft. Joshua Wong 又係陳智思之降低食物中鹽和糖委員會 香港人 你講哂啦 Gone In The Blink Of An Eye In Memory of Timothy Chu 學生的選擇 泛民失守內會 建制包攬正副主席 窮是原罪？ 香港 窮得只剩下錢？ Power of the Protest [技術文][足球台] 香港足球何去何從?

What’s Happening in London?

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

EDITORIAL Hi Readers!

It is my pleasure to bring to you our first edition of PASS-On Monthly.

Thanks for taking the time to read it! This is our first year launching PASS-On and we hope it will be informative, thought-provoking and entertaining.

We are also letting our members contribute by submitting their own articles. Let your voice be heard! If you have any opinions or requests, please don't hesitate to let us know!

This month has been an eventful start to our year. From our Panel Discussion Ft. Joshua Wong to announcement of this year's Charity Partner, sub-committee recruitment, and numerus PASS-On articles, this edition is a good kick-start and we hope you will enjoy reading it.

Also, HKPASS is a social community so, in order to make your stay in London as enjoyable as possible, we’ve brought to you the latest events and deal. Don’t forget to check out what is happening in London this upcoming month which includes a list of all the ice-rinks open this Christmas!

Zoe Liu

(Publications Officer 2015-16) Page 3

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

Page 4

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

Page 5

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

SUB-COMMITTEE 2015-16

Page 6

PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIVISION Christine Chan Matthew Cheung Crystal Lai Janice Leung Eric Li Michael Shi Adrian So Raymond So Cody Wang Claudia Wong Jason Yan

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

SOCIAL SERVICE DIVISION Gwen Chan Kathy Cheung John Cheung Vanessa Cheung Tsz Kiu Ho Amy Huang Rowena Lee Steph Lee Helen Li Kevin Lim Nicole Tse Lilian Wong Tiffany Yau John Yu

PUBLICATIONS DIVISION Designers Kathy Cheung Rowena Lee Writers Janice Leung Helen Li Adrian So Lilian Wong

Page 7

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

..... ‘pass’ed EVENT

PANEL DISCUSSION FT. JOSHUA WONG Wednesday 21st October 2015 6:30pm - 8:30pm

Page 8

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

‘on’ to the next .....

SS CHARITY SALES Monday 16th - Tuesday 17th November Outside Saw Swee Hock

Page 9

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

Democratisation in Hong Kong and THE Role of the People’s Republic of China - Our Thoughts October 25th, 2015 Zoe Liu (PO) With so many talks being given by Joshua Wong recently, much of what he says may be quite repetitive. Especially as we have read and seen so much on the matter. So it was only fitting to invite along professors to stimulate greater discussion and provide a wider range of views to provoke further thoughts and opinions. Hopefully, that's exactly what we have achieved, and here are the views of our PAO and 3 of the PO sub-committee members who were present at the event.

Page 10

NAOMI CHAN

Public Affairs Officer 'Is Joshua Wong even eligible to hold a conference in one of the most prestigious universities in the UK? He is only a child, who is so radical and his acts are always not mature enough in order to survive under the wrist of the Chinese or even the Hong Kong government.'

Indeed, Joshua is only a 19 year-old guy, and he is the founder of Scholarism, a student activist group in Hong Kong. As Joshua mentioned during the conference, he started to be involved in political protest as early as the age of 14, protesting against the High Speed Rail in 2010. The Anti-Civi Education Demonstration in 2012 marked the beginning of Joshua's involvement in political protests. Being vocal in civil disobedience

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

and student movements gained him fame within the political community. Being a key player and also the first few who crossed the police border whilst 'invading' the Citizens' Square during the Umbrella Movement last September, brought global media attention to this teen.

The Times Magazine during that period of time placed Joshua onto their cover for their Asia Edition, making him well-known across the globe.

Trying to be political neutral at all times, the radical ideas about democratisation of Hong Kong by Joshua is not the main factor that appeals to me, nor the fame that a youngster can gain through involving in student movements in Hong Kong.

What strikes me is his ambition and his courage in taking up such a challenging role during such a difficult time in Hong Kong. In the eyes of the older generation, full democracy and universal suffrage seem to be a goal that merely exist in their dreams. 'It can never be achieved in Hong Kong.

Bear in mind although it is a so-called 'special administrative region' of China, afterall, in the eyes of the Beijing government, it may be of no difference with other major and emerging cities in China, such as Shenzhen, Shanghai.'

In times when worries and concerns about the future of Hong Kong in the next 30 years (before the end of the 50-year promise of the 'One Country, Two Systems' agreed between the Chinese and British government in 1984) circulates within the Hong Kong community, we are indeed, grateful to have people from the younger generation, such as Joshua, who is willing to stand for Hong Kong. I end with a note of advice that Joshua specifically spoke in Cantonese to the audience, who are mostly from students from Hong Kong: The future of Hong Kong do rely on you all, the elites who being so fortunate to be educated in such prestigious institutions in the UK. Please do come back after you have all graduated. Hong Kong needs you.

LILIAN WONG

(PO/SS Sub-Committee) As I saw this young boy of our age making his way to the discussion panel with an ordinary school bag which looked like the one we all once had, accompanied by a undisguised look of exhaustion on his face, there wasn’t an immense sense of marvel and awe that I usually felt at a talk given by renowned academics or professionals. Joshua Wong was not present that night as a lecturer, but as a student who wished to share his insight and experience to his equals. I believe the PowerPoint presentation given by Joshua wasn’t relatively impressive to most of us as the information was rather factual and most of the students who went to the discussion that night Page 11

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

would have familiarised themselves with the pro-democracy movements in recent years. As a result, the spotlight of the night rested upon the Q&A session where direct interactions took place.

The most poignant and forthright question that everyone was secretly hoping for came in the middle of the discussion, when the question of whether the Umbrella Movement was counter-productive was raised candidly in light of its subsequent intensification of social division and economic consequences. This challenge was overturned by Joshua with a simple yet gripping response – It was not Scholarism who has divided the citizens of Hong Kong but the government and the CCP’s persistent refusal to dialogue and

direct negotiations. Rerum Cognoscere Causas - ‘To Know the Causes of Things’ is the motto of LSE, and to my surprise, Joshua, with his heavy Cantonese accent, seemed to have better spelled out the essence of the motto than a LSE student. Would divergence in political views and raising voices for socio-economic demands have been non-existent if they had not been manifested in this movement? Not everyone prefers blunt confrontations and the tension it inevitably brought upon every aspect of our daily life. Many have found it difficult to start an unpleasant argument with our beloved ones on this sensitive issue when you are supposed to have a peaceful conversation during dinner time. All these fears are more than justifiable and I see no reason why you

should insist on deepening the division with a two-edged sword. However, the point of divergence here is not about whether you prefer smooth peanut butter over crunchy, but on which path should your home embark in the near future.

The Umbrella Movement is not the cause of the dissatisfaction and frustration plaguing the city, but a wakeup call for those who wished to bring about changes to the deep-seated, root cause of things – the lack of people’s representation in the political sphere. This shortcoming, combined with the government’s failure to recognise and respond to existing social demands has culminated to an extreme sense of powerlessness and the resistance movement was a consequence born out of it.

As an ending note, some suggested that the shift towards democracy was a long journey for a China which was not even long liberated from feudalism. In their view, what we need is to wait for a generational transfer of power to the younger generations of China, the future leaders of the country. I doubt whether such an erratic wait is worthwhile for us to bet all our chips on. Time may or may not change the minds of the Zhongnanhai

Page 12

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

successors but it could definitely blur our memories, as well as our children’s, on why we resisted in the September of 2014. As Joshua had made clear in his final remarks, we cannot rely solely on the support from the international community and we surely cannot rely on the gradual change in the CCP’s way of ruling envisaged by some political analysts. All we could do is to stop burying our heads in the pile of sand assembled deliberately under the name of prosperity or social harmony, but instead, be more informed on the political developments in Hong Kong and come to your own judgment. Rerum Cognoscere Causas.

“We can’t tell the Chinese what to do; they will punish us if we do!”

JANICE LEUNG

(PO/PA Sub-Committee) Joshua Wong was obviously the star of the show, but the one sentence that stuck with me was this: “We can’t tell the Chinese what to do; they will punish us if we do!”

Professor Christopher Hughes could not have put it any better. The “we” in this statement could refer to any group of people – few could stand up to China’s current economic and political weight without eventually making at least some concessions in China’s favour. China’s meteoric rise to superpower status over the past decade has left most of the former European imperial powers in the dust.

Its censorship keeps the domestic population under tight control; those who fight it must keep dodging the Great Firewall’s ever-growing

blacklist of phrases with increasingly creative ways.

Dissenters are spirited away like they never existed, even though everyone knows where they have gone. Of course, these are grossly theatrical overgeneralizations, but nonetheless the point stands. The one-party state may be ruthless and corrupt, but you have to admit it is very good at doing its job.

But that’s not the focus of this article.

What really caught my attention was the second half of the statement – “they will punish us if we do!” This raises a question: why does China retaliate? Although it has the capacity to do so, it could choose not to – there are many other ways to reject a proposal or halt a movement. It could use dialogue, compromise, set agreements; the list goes on. So why does it choose to be aggressive? The answer is very complex, but I believe a Page 13

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

“Winning the support of the wider public requires experience” part of it lies in the history, both personal and modal, of China’s leadership.

The current Chinese leadership experienced firsthand the tumultuous 1970s and 80s, a period of unprecedented social upheaval. As with any experience, it shapes individuals’ outlook and behavior. To the outsider, the heavy-handed methods employed by the government seem incongruous and anachronistic to the supposedly modern world China has become a citizen of; to them, these methods are all they have ever known.

The last time there were any serious calls for reform on the mainland, it ended with tanks storming Tiananmen Square – bloody as the event was, it proved that punishment was a viable method for silencing dissent.

Fast forward a decade or so, Hong Kong’s Occupy Page 14

movement, Taiwan’s Sunflower Movement and Xinjiang and Tibet’s growing restlessness for autonomy all seem to be replays of the pro-reform movements of the 1980s. Drawing on past experience, the logical response to these challenges to the central government is punishment – not of the same kind as June 4th, but punishment nonetheless.

Looking beyond the people who make up the central government, one could even argue that the nature of China’s leadership has never changed – to this day, it is dynastic, with the President as the Emperor, and the people as his subjects. The people have no say in who governs and who does not, the middling ranks of the CCP cater to the whims of their superiors in hopes of rising to a higher level, the highest leadership defers to the wishes of the President;

how does this look any different from China from circa two thousand years ago? Of course, this is a very speculative argument, but one that is worth thinking about.

If China’s aggression is caused by the traumatic experiences of China’s leadership, then it follows that a generational change in leadership may bring reform. The new generation will have grown up in a time of peace and prosperity, as well as with access to a wealth of information through the growth of the internet and social media.

The next group of leaders will have been shaped by very different experiences to their predecessors, and so will very possibly have different approaches to governance. Perhaps all democracy needs in China is time – the democracy movements just have to be patient and keep resisting until then.

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

HELEN LI

(PO/SS Sub-Committee) I have heard many things about Joshua Wong, and this talk was, for me, the first time seeing him in the flesh.

I came to the talk with a genuine interest in what he himself had to say about his actions, the Umbrella Movement and the political climate in Hong Kong; I left feeling somewhat overwhelmed by how I felt after his rather emotive closing words. Despite this, after the emotions subsided, I began to really pick apart what were some of the still unanswered concerns I had about what he said.

Although Joshua remains optimistic about rallying more of the civil society to join in on his pursuit for universal suffrage, and eventually self-determination for Hong Kong, whatever bargaining chip we could construct from this seems weak and small.

Even if Hong Kong elites were to abandon the city by 2047, the Beijing government may merely see this as an opportunity to open the floodgates and effectively replace the city, already entrenched by gentrification, with Mainland Chinese – essentially, a “new Hong Kong”. The Guangzhou-Shenzen-Hong Kong Rail Express Link (due to be finished in 2018) after

all, will make it much easier for this “migration” to occur.

There is also the question of the aftermath of self-determination in Hong Kong, and whether it will result in real liberation of the people, or societal crisis and collapse. Self-determination does not always lead to desirable outcomes, and it would be naïve to assume that success previous colonies experienced with self-determination is indicative of how it would transpire for Hong Kong.

With regards to his aim to gain wider public support, I do think that for a large part of the older generation who remain stubbornly skeptical of his efforts, this is an opposition rooted in their disapproval of his “hot-blooded” behaviour rather than towards universal suffrage as a basic human

right. Winning the support of the wider public requires experience; an acute understanding of what different sectors in a society want and a clear idea of how to balance these different needs. Despite these apparent concerns, I applaud Joshua’s bravery and admire his relentless perseverance towards what he believes to be right for Hong Kong.

Page 15

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

March 18th, 2015 The Freelance Guy 由人大代表撈到社會服務聯 會，要數公職，陳智思認第 二肯定冇人敢認第一。日前 陳智思又獲欽點做降低食物 中鹽和糖委員會主席，負責 制定政策方向同工作計劃去 減低市民既鹽和糖攝入量及 食物中既鹽和糖含量。 小弟有幸同陳智思傾過下計 ；佢畢業於美國加州的波莫 納學院藝術系，佢話簡呢科 係因為當時患上血管收縮病 症高安氐動脈炎，要成日出 出入入醫院；佢根本無可能 長期係校園，而成間學校得 佢呢科 Studio Art 可以唔洗 返學都可以考試，所以就從 Econ transfer 左去讀藝術， 畢業後係老豆既亞洲保險做 野。 1998年，佢循立法會保險界 功能組別晉身立法會，正式 開始佢既公職王故事。佢憶 述，第一日返立法會就俾當 年主席范徐召見。果時大陸 岩岩收返香港，立法會想改 改個Logo, 但成個立法會淨 Page 16

係得佢係讀 Art，所以就欽 點左佢負責設計新 Logo呢壇 野。佢話，其實佢讀Studio Art 又點會識設計Logo呢， 不過上頭叫到咪硬食囉 ⋯佢 話當時佢只係負責簡Logo, 設計就係出面搵人做；不過 呢簡邊個Logo 都唔容易，紅 色又怕得罪泛民；綠藍又驚 建制派唔鍾意，所以最後 ( 即係大家見到果個) 簡左呢 個黃/灰，有中有英既Logo 。 2009 年果時社會好興講活 化，於事立法會主席曾鈺成 就派陳智思去活化歷史建築

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

屆特首黑馬，所以派佢去邊 疆唔俾佢上位？ 係掛⋯ CY 之前咪又講過N屆唔選特 首既，陳智思今年都講過無 意參選特首架！ 諮詢委員會，諗住呢D文化 ( 藝術) 既野都差唔多架啦。 做左呢個主席之後又順便做 埋可持續發展委員會同古物 諮詢委員會主席，又話差唔 多性質喎⋯ (又引證到政府 做野求求其其) 咁儲下儲下 咪做左公職王囉。 有人話，係咪CY怕左呢隻下

Donald曾 做特首前都俾人派 去做清潔大隊長啦，而家陳 智思咪減肥大隊長囉！ 老懵董以前係行會做過，從 政前都係處理家族集團生意 ，陳智思都係呀！ 至於上面講左乜野，自己參 透下啦⋯

Page 17

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

你講哂啦︕ 香港人

August 25th, 2015 Naomi Chan (PAO) 説好的港鐵「可加可減機 制」為何每年的車費只是 有增無減? 港鐵故障頻繁 ，時至2014年8月最少每 兩天就會出現訊號故障列 車延誤，港鐵更預告未來 延誤將會更嚴重，甚至有 增無減。服務質素宾與車 費成正比嗎？ 茶餐廳又轉換了餐牌? 想 二十元「堂食」菠蘿油再 加上一杯凍奶茶? 恐怕想 得太美了 現在甚至連想 吃新地筒也得比以前多掏 出幾個錢幣...為何香港政 府就不能採取更強硬的手 段，限制每天、每星期、 每月甚至每年內地訪港人 數? 難道香港政府對待雙 非單非問題就是那麼束手 無策? 為何能不斷容許內 地新來港人士與香港人進 行形形式式的爭奪戰? 戰 場從早期的醫院床位、醫 療設備，發展到為人熟悉 的居住房屋、 職位，甚 至到近年的小學、中學、 大學學位。不停的覇佔， 為何香港政府仍然視若無 睹? 為何香港的街道現在 變成了藥房街? 為何小商 戶不斷被趕盡殺絕，好像 什麼都是被大財團地產商 壟斷? 而政府還在採用隻 眼開隻開閉 這些掩耳盜 鈴的方法? 百物騰貴，為何每年薪金

Page 18

百物騰貴，為何每年薪金 卻是停滯不前? 為何香港 這個城市空氣質素甚至居 住環境也大不如前? 經歷 過雨傘運動的洗禮，也許 香港警察已大不如前，保 護市民好像已不再變成他 們的責任。看到這裡你也 許會贊同香港政府一事無 成的做法而把香港弄得如 斯田地。’ 可是請大家再花多些少時 間閲讀一下以下的分析。 香港人好像就是永遠只是 懂得在怨天尤人。 埋怨港鐵車費有增無減， 不斷有事故， 倒不如請 看看近幾年港鐵的載客量 。 其實港鐵某些線路早 於二零一一年已超出負荷 。相信不少香港人也經歷 過上下班時於金鐘轉乘觀 塘線的「人山人海」。根 據港鐵的數據顯示，港鐵 現在平均每天服務超過四 百萬人次，相比起二零一 一年的一百六十多萬人次 多出兩倍之多；而港鐵仍

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

然能保持99.9%準時度的 服務承諾。其實港鐵某些 線路早於二零一一年已超 出負荷。維修員每天只有 三至四小時檢查及維修車 輛及車軌，以確保每天能 安全、及時護送接近過半 香港人口上班及回家。其 實港鐵某些線路早於二零 一一年已超出負荷。相信 不少香港人也經歷過上下 班時於金鐘轉乘觀塘線的 「人山人海。也許香港人 就是被寵壞了。 在另一 邊箱的歐美國家甚至近在 咫尺的日本，同樣是發展 國家，大多數人也必定經 歷過火車班次被延誤，多 等候十五至二十分鐘已是 司空見慣，而乘客卻顯得 非常鎮定，靜心等候下一 班列車。這種情況在香港 發生的時候，只會惹來香 港人最擅長的舉動—用手 機拍下片段和相片，急不 及待地上載到社交網站， 同一時間向全世界的人大 吐苦水；然後再投訴，向 那些盡力及盡責地向受影

響的乘客解釋一切事宜的 職員破口大罵， 搬出一 大堆自我中心的大道理， 好像自己是這個世上最悲 慘最可憐的人一樣。什麼 前途盡毀影響業績等等恐 怕大家已耳熟能詳。 試想想：香港人從來也只 是好像要什麼事情都要投 訴一番才能心滿意足地過 日子。 先來一群上班族表達了不 滿面對不平等和過低的薪 酬及待遇，然後政府便推 出了最低工資的政策以紓 解民困。可是，不久就面 對百物騰貴的局面。此時 香港人便擅長地把訴求通 過無數的遊行來表達出來 。也許他們似乎忘掉了過 去之所以能受惠於便宜的 生活價格，有部分是由於 過去小職員被老闆欺壓， 受到過低的薪酬待遇卻仍 然默不作聲。員工受到最 低工資的保障後，上級為 求換取企業最大的利潤， 不惜一切也要向消費者著

手， 形成「糖又加 鹽又 加」的局面不斷出現。 香港的青年人與其花時間 埋怨學位、資源、職位、 機會一律都被內地學生搶 光， 倒不如積極裝備好 自己。不甘心、不願意被 社會淘汰、被內地人取替 的話就必須要好好利用自 己的優勢及力求上進 那 。終日只懂得反對內地人 來港爭奪資源卻什麼都不 願做的人，恐怕很快會被 這個弱肉強食的社會所嫌 棄。也許「有危便有機」 這句話用在這裡能夠鼓勵 一下香港的年青人。不想 被淘汰的話就請你們把自 己堅強的一面拿出來！內 地學生之所以能擁有那麼 多的機會，不少也是憑著 自己努力不懈的精神。這 時也許是你們的機會向香 港、甚至全世界的僱主證 明你們也有優勝與驕人的 一面。 最後，請容我說一句：香 港人 祝君好運.

Page 19

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

September 2nd, 2015 Zoe Liu (PO) After having returned back to London for a month before coming back to Hong Kong to attend the Freshers’ events in my capacity as Publications Officer, I was so shocked to find what a big difference a month makes.

Let me explain, I live in Sheung Shui which is a Mainlander hotspot. Since the Government introduced a policy limiting the Mainlanders coming into Hong Kong so often, the roads really have become wider and even the train station, where they usually get off and hang around for an hour or so before boarding again for a discount journeying back to Mainland, seems a little more spacious.

Page 20

But don’t get me wrong, this post isn’t just about Mainlanders, it’s about the rate of change that occurs in Hong Kong. In only one

month, my favourite desert place Hui Lau Shan has already been replaced by a new shop, Coral Cafe on the high street has also been totally refurbished, and even a pharmacy which only just celebrated an extravagant opening in July when I was last here has already closed down.

Compare this to where I used to live in a small town called Aldershot in Hampshire in UK where part of the shopping centre took 5 years (FIVE YEARS!) to refurbish. Every year when I come back to Hong Kong there’s always been something that has changed, but this really is immense progress. It’s no wonder Hong Kong is a world commercial centre.

The phrase ‘time equals money” really does ring true here.

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

In Memory of Timothy Chu Public Affairs Officer HKPASS 2006 – 2007 It is with deep sorrow that we tell you that Timothy Chu, LSESU HKPASS 2006-07 Public Affairs Officer, has unfortunately passed away. He went missing at a scuba diving trip, and his body was subsequently found at Race Rocks in Victoria, British Colombia. Timothy was a fine member of our society who made significant and enduring contributions. Our hearts go out to his friends and family.

Below is an article prepared by the 2006-07.

Timothy Chu was the Public Affairs Officer (“PAO”) of HKPASS in 2006-2007. Tim passed away from a diving incident in July 2015.

Nine years ago we worked with Tim in the HKPASS Committee. Back then, HKPASS was a small student society. We did not have a big membership base or a lot of sponsors. What we had was a dedicated Committee and a core group of members who believed in what HKPASS stood for: promoting public affairs awareness and social services. As the PAO, Tim

played an important role in our work that year.

Tim organised a good number of activities for HKPASS. There was the annual Cambridge Quiz for which Tim put together the LSE team. Tim also interviewed Emily Lau, Long Hair and James Tien with other members for the society’s newsletter. Looking back at those interview reports from nine years ago, you see pictures of a young, smiling, bright-eyed Tim standing next to the politicians, having just

quizzed them on the hot political topics of the day such as Goods and Services Sales Tax, Chief Executive election and universal suffrage.

The main event which Tim organised that year was the “Public Affairs Tea”. As Tim reported in the society newsletter, it was the first of its kind and, from what we could gather, probably also the last in the history of HKPASS. The genesis of this “Tea” was that we did not manage to invite any speaker of some calibre to host the usual “Global Forum” (this Page 21

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015 caused some commotion within the Committee), and so as a fall-back Tim organised what some of us liked to do best: sitting around and discussing public affairs over tea and crisps.

As far as “talking politics” go, the “Tea” was pretty informative and intellectually heavy-going. The “Tea” was organised around the Chief Executive election which was to take place later that year.

Tim had the sub-committee prepared a document pack to facilitate discussions. Two members presented on the platforms of the then Chief Executive candidates, Donald Tsang and Alan Leong. The finale was a mock election, in which 30 or so members voted for the candidate of their choice in a classroom in the East Building. In the event, Donald won in this HKPASS election, as he did in real life. Right after our election result was announced, without missing a beat, Tim played the Miss Hong Kong Pageant theme.

That was Tim’s style of humour.

More generally, Tim saw the fun in public affairs and other intellectual endeavours, and wanted to share that view with us and to instil that playfulness in what he did for the society. Many of us in the society found Tim endearing.

A kind, fun-loving and somewhat intellectually serious young man like Tim would always have, you know, his fair share of the “market interest”. The Committee Page 22

certainly noted with interest that Tim was affectionately referred to as “Tim朱豬” by a group of female members.

That year Tim and us tried to promote public affairs and social services in our humble ways, with our humble resources. We are not sure to what extent we succeeded or failed. After all, it was somewhat of a hard-sell telling people that what HKPASS was doing was sexier than, say, strutting your stuff at the Ministry of Sound with the Chinese Society. However, what we are sure about is that Tim was most probably the best man we could get when

it came to selling that almost impossible message. It was because Tim believed in it and lived it, and he did so not just as PAO in 2006/2007, but also throughout his life.

Tim stood out amongst this Committee as the one who truly lived and breathed the ethos of HKPASS, of being politically and socially aware and giving back to the society through volunteering work.

After LSE, Tim worked at the House of Commons as a Parliamentary reporter. He also served in the British Army Reserve and was awarded Solider of the Year in 2011.

Further, Tim volunteered as a

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015 crisis. In juxtaposition, over the years Tim seemed to have become happier, more contented, and actually looked better compared to his younger self back in LSE. In the last two months since the incident, Tim’s friends from different walks of life got together to show support in their respective ways. We learnt from each other more about Tim, and how Tim had touched our lives. We also got to learn more about Tim’s family, who has dealt with this very difficult situation with tremendous grace and composure. Tim left us way, way too early. There was clearly a lot ahead of him.

Metropolitan Police Special Constable. On top of that, Tim engaged in other charity and church commitments.

Tim also completed his law degree whilst working, and was about to begin his traineeship with the HMRC Legal Department. Tim somehow also managed to squeeze in time for his language studies (he was fluent in French and proficient in Japanese, Spanish and Latin), travels and interests.

We lost track of Tim’s long list of interests, and only knew after the incident that Tim was also an avid diver.

We last saw Tim during

Chinese New Year earlier this year, when he came back to Hong Kong for holiday. True to HKPASS form, we talked extensively about Occupy Central. Tim also updated us about his life in London. It was clear that Tim was loving life and looking forward to the next stage in his career in the legal field. It was actually refreshing to see Tim, because having lived life to the fullest the way he had, you could feel that Tim rose above the fray of us average Hong Kong graduates, who walk around Central with our expanding waistlines and that tired expression that suggests an early onset of a mid-life

We would like to end with an excerpt of a poem by Rupert Brooke. These two lines by Brooke are set on the walls inside the 12-sided WWII memorial shrine in the Memorial Garden in Central.

As Tim was a soldier, we thought these lines to be a fitting tribute to him:

“These had seen movement, and heard music; known Slumber and waking; loved; gone proudly friended” HKPASS 2006 – 2007

Page 23

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

學生的選擇

September 30th, 2015 Naomi Chan (PAO) 這陣子閲到朋友在社交網 站分享的一篇文章，感慨 地說到現在的香港社會風 氣仍然鼓吹學生修讀「傳 統」科目。所謂「傳統」 科目包括醫學、法律、金 融業、物理治癒等等。 身邊很多的朋友也在選修 這些科目。只是真的有興 趣投身這些行列的卻是寥 寥可數。相信大家也有聽 說過以下的說法：「其實 我真的不太清楚自己的興 趣是什麼？有能力報讀這 些所謂的神科就一定要試 試。不試好像跟自己過不 去」「我本來就是對什麼 什麼科有興趣，很想學到 更多那方面的知識，只是 父母期望我將來能夠成為 醫生。」「父母想我讀法 律。」「好像畢業時能手 握一個專業資格能具備一 個優勢？」

Page 24

無可否認，確實有一部分 選讀「神科」的學生自身 是對那方面的知識有興趣 ，而大學正正提供這個機 會給他們發掘更多。可是 ，為了迎合主流社會的意 願及價值，而去選擇跟自 己的興趣背道而馳的出路 ，值得嗎？ 香港政府是時候醒過來了 。過去那套只注重金融行 業的方法並不再可行。隨 著香港的國際金融中心的 地位逐漸被其他亞洲城市 取締，（如新加坡、上海 ）是時候為香港創造多一 條血路吧！儘管過去的政 府常地「六大產業」放在 口邊，卻有多少是真的實 行了？成立科學園是為了 提倡本地的科研發展，可 是政府投放在科學研究的 資源，相信大家也有目共 睹。即使是對科研有興趣 的學生，也要向「在香港 做科研比在歐美的欠發展 空間前途」這些現實低頭 。有經濟條件的，紛紛逃

到海外追尋理想。是否只 是能有即時回報的行業才 值得受重視？歐美國家的 經濟增長雖然不及我們的 快，可是他們有著懂得及 時轉型的優勢，也有源源 不絕的科研人才，令轉型 到持續發展、創意產業比 香港更為容易。是時候發 生 香港家長是時候醒過來了 。強力灌輸那套「有能力 一定要讀神科的概念」並 不再可行了。現在的孩子 每人都具備著不同的天賦 。不能再常常拿自己的孩 子與別人的作比較。所謂 「行行出狀元」。況且現 在的孩子從小已有多方面 的接觸，很多時可能比家 長想像的更要成熟。關乎 到孩子自己的將來，為何 就不能給孩子自己決定？ 臨近中學生涯的末端，相 信很多學生已接近成年的 歲數。為何就不能給他們 一個機會去決定自己的人 生路向？是時候讓他們學 懂要為自己的決定而負起 責任來。 香港學生是時候醒過來了 。放心追尋自己的理想吧 ！即使社會的主流文化不 多認同，香港要具備轉型 的條件也需要依靠你們。 你甘心一輩子也得做社會 的奴隸嗎？

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

泛民失守內會 建制包攬正副主席 October 10th, 2015 The Freelance Guy 立法會話咁快又就黎復會 ，不過未開會已經有花生 食。各個事務委員會相繼 開始投票簡正副主席，而 簡稱內會既內務委員會今 日就率先開戰，最後由建 制派既梁君彥同馬逢國當 選正副主席。 先講講內會係乜─ 內務委員會係繼大會(大家 最熟悉既立法會)後最重要 的會議；根據返立法會個 網，「內務委員會為立法 會會議作準備，並商議與 立法會事務有關的事宜。 內務委員會的一項重要職 能，是審議已提交立法會 的法案，以及在立法會會 議席上提交省覽或提交立 法會批准的附屬法例」。 簡單黎講，政府想制定既 法律通常都會放入內會研 究同討論，同埋審議與法 案有關的修訂條文。

「曾鈺成不信任動議梁君 彥 hea住做」 (https://www.youtube.co m/watch?v=WN2ESUbCel U) 仲有同內會同等重要既財 委會，吳亮星主席都展示 過做主席可以點樣影響個 會議: 「吳亮星 無視泛民強行表 決 粗暴通過東北撥款(足本 ) [2014-06-27]」 (https://www.youtube.co m/watch?v=RD27XiBGrR U) 強烈建議大家睇曬佢，精 采絕倫。 內務委員會由立法會主席 以外所有議員組成，咁既 然係咁，建制派坐擁42個 立法會議席(主席唔計)，咁 一人一票點投都係建制包 攬正副主席架啦，有乜新 奇？

會中既各個委員會，泛民 同建制派都會互相協調由 邊個做正副主席，而內務 委員會傳統上都係由泛民 既議員擔任副主席，以保 持同促進各黨派係立法會 上既溝通同合作。自從泛 民上年係立法會到偷襲人 事編制同工務小組委員會 既正副主席，以及佔有呢 兩個小組既過半數票數（ 其他內務委員會通常都係 報名參加，議員根據自己 範籌報名參加，而此舉泛 民所有議員一齊報名加入 ），以掌控所有議程進度 箝制建制派。建制派自此 （當然仲有好多唔同議會 內外既不和同磨擦促使） 決定唔再同泛民協調各內 務委員會中既正副主席。 至於泛民會唔會失去埋其 他內會正副兩席，下一步 應該點行，未來會唔會因 此而發生更多議會內既不 合作運動，大家拭目以待 啦.

事關其實一直以來，立法

咁控制內會有乜戰略作用 ？ 首先，內務委員會主席負 責主持會議。你可能會問 ，唔係有曬程序規矩架咩 ，做主席有乜方法影響到 個會議，繼而為自己黨派 帶來最大利益？我唔直接 去答你, 用例子答： Page 25

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

窮是原罪？

Page 26

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

October 12th, 2015 The Freelance Guy 今日同大家計下數 你今年65歲，無仔女無供 過強積金，有25萬棺材本 ，排唔到公屋，文盲（就 算過到入息審查都唔識申 請長生津），行動不便， 你可以有幾多年命？ 首先你有$1235 生果金， 住劏房月租$4000，每日 三餐$30 加埋其他開支， 每個月加多 $1,000，即係 每年淨收入係$-45,180， 棺材$1,000 (淘寶貨)，海 葬唔洗錢⋯ 即係大概， ($250,000-$1000)/ $45,180 = 5.51 年你就會 岩岩好無曬錢可以去買棺 材 (希望唔會有通漲，否則 更快) 其實只係想帶出香港既老 人福利係幾咁不足姐 今日係政總舉行左第三屆 扶貧高峰會，公布左上年

度貧窮率為14.3%。即係乜 ？即係你收入低過$3500 就係窮人，大概一百萬人 到，而非綜援長者貧窮人 口佔左24.5萬人。長者人 口過去一年增加近4萬人， 預料隨人口老化，長者貧 窮人口只會不斷上升，而 長者福利津貼等議題只會 越來越逼切。 全民退休保障計劃（全民 退保）由我未出世講到而 家都只係得個講字；政府 硬推強積金又年年蝕，又 完全顧及唔到而家已經退 左休又無供過既老人家； 現時既老人福利又唔夠全 面，審查制度又嚴，錢又 派得少，百物騰貴，對長 者來講真係好重負擔，好 大壓力。 有好多人反對設立全民退 保，因為將會涉及龐大開 支，嚴重到當年陳佐洱直 情話全民退保會導致香港 「車毀人亡」。其實而家 社會上提倡既全民退保每 月金額係三千元左右，每 年開支係三百六十億元。 三百六十億對香港黎講係 幾多？第三條跑道係2000 億 （航空管制問題起完都

唔一定飛得），東北發展 用左1200億（淨係得6％ 地起公房，仲要當中285億 落左地產商手）仲有d乜乜 港珠澳大橋中部水域人工 島港深機場鐵路西九文化 區郵輪碼頭加加埋埋d大白 象萬幾億（係真係萬幾億 ）。 各位身為幸福既一群，可 能從來無試過貧窮，無捱 過肚餓，無見過劏房，未 必感受到明白到香港貧富 懸殊有幾嚴重。唔好咁離 地，大家試諗下，而家到 你活係貧窮線下，成世操 勞到頭來三餐溫飽都成問 題，你又會點？ 政府起勢咁推d大白象，係 咁倒儲備落海，起完野又 唔實用；咁點解又一直唔 肯投放更多資源俾一班有 逼切需要既長者呢？大家 有朝一日都會老，將心比 己，有邊個唔想安享晚年 ？ 可能我講得唔夠說服力， 都係交返俾余婆婆： https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=1PqGgygOf1w Page 27

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

香港 窮得只剩下錢？ 的工作崗位。「事業比生 命中什麼事都重要」這個 觀念也許上班一族也無容 置疑。

October 15th, 2015 Naomi Chan (PAO) 香港這個步伐急速的城市 ，走到熙來攘往的街道上 ，每個人都像在戰戰兢兢 地朝著自己的目標前進。 這種現象近年由市區急速 擴散到所謂新發展的「新 市鎮」。香港人緊張兮兮 的面孔，隨處可見，彷彿 生活不容許他們稍為輕鬆 一點，得抓緊每一分每一 刻去完成那些他們眼中「 重要」的事情。也許是這 種努力不懈、勤奮上進的 精神 （有些人眼中的獅子 山精神），成功令香港於 短短百多年間，從一個毫 不起眼的小漁港，搖身一 變成為今天的國際金融中 心，贏得「東方之珠」的 美譽，甚至成功連續數年 躋身十大世界最重要經濟 體系。金融市場的影響力 更加不容忽視。 可是，繁華的背後，有多 少個辛酸的故事？ 經濟逢勃的推動力，是耗 用了多少個上班族，不論 藍領或是白領，的血汗和 時間換來的成果。他們這 群人，也許每天二十四小 時當中，有接近一半的時 間在埋首工作，有些甚至 為了工作，每天只有三分 之一的時間「逃離」自己

Page 28

（新聞透視 準時收工 2015-4-11） https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=cdtEnMo8JIU 可是，也許正正是因為整 個社命的風氣，這個政府 ，整個城市只是著眼於實 體回報的關係，造成香港 人那種凡事漠不關心的處 世態度。甚至關乎到自己 的議題，也是事情到了燃 眉之急才醒覺要亡羊補牢 。每當政府提出要拆卸這 橦建築那橦大廈，大家才 紛紛「起義」，揚言要誓 死守護香港人所謂的集體 回憶。皇后碼頭如是，古 樹如是。雨傘運動的揭幕 ，正正是香港這個社會的 寫照。有言論認為，其實 不少香港人希望透過這種 「驚天地」政治運動，喚 醒社會各界對存在於這個 城市的根本問題的關注。 (突破：港人逐步接納社會 行動對青少年社會參與持 正面態度（9月10日） http://christiantimes.org.h k/Common/Reader/News /ShowNews.jsp?Nid=6171 9&Pid=5&Version=0&Cid =220 香港雖成為國際大都會， 舉足輕重的城市，可是其 發展也一直只局限於促進 經濟增長，與經濟金錢以 外的事情，恐怕難喚醒社 會的關注。政府在保育、 環境保護、創意產業的工

作上，一直持著被動的角 色，採用一貫「兵來將擋 」的態度。從政府對擴建 及計劃三個堆填區的態度 ，能充分地體會到這個政 府對廢物處置這個問題欠 缺周詳的計劃。古蹟的保 育，往往也只是輕描淡寫 ，只是頒給建築一個「歷 史建築文物」的欽頭而已 ，從此就沒有提供足夠的 資源去進行保育的工作。 香港鴨脷洲洪聖街洪聖古 廟如果，新界元朗的吉慶 圍如是。有多少人曾親身 到訪過香港的文物探知館 、茶具文物館？；維多利 亞港的填海工程，有增無 減，令香港獨有的中華白 海豚逐漸失去惟一的棲息 地，面臨頻危絕種的危機 ；香港是一個不重視創意 及文化的城市。請看看屹 立不倒的博物館：科學館 裏的展品三十年不變，歷 史博物館裏的展覽，最為 人熟悉的，也許就是「香 港故事」。討論多年的西 九文化區遲遲未落成；大 眾對政府於科研方面投資 的認知，也只是局限於科 學園和數碼港的落成。政 府在文化這方面提供的資 源，更是寥寥可數。植根 廣東省的粵劇文化，也曾 因二零零五年，粵劇表演 場地新光戲院易權轉售而 不再出租予粵劇劇團的決 定更哄動一時。 是政府對社會議題抱有「 一動不如一靜」的態度， 還是因為香港只重視即時 回報的社會風氣，才把香 港弄成「窮得只剩下金錢 」的田地？

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

October 15th, 2015 Naomi Chan (PAO) Naomi Chan considers the history of protest in China, leading to a discussion of the recent ‘Umbrella Revolution’ in Hong Kong and what it has meant, and will mean for China’s political landscape.

The word ‘protest’ is never new to Asia, and certainly not to the Western world.

It is revolution, generated from public protests, that kick-started the evolution of many Western democracies. Protests are commonly used as tools for the general public to express their discontent over a certain issue in society and thus, demand change. The doctrine of ‘non-violent’ protest was first introduced in the 1920s by Gandhi, the leader of the Indian nationalist movement against British rule. The success of India’s breaking away from being a British colony was greatly appreciated by Martin Luther King, who then upheld similar principles

during his fight for the civil rights of African Americans in the 1960s.

Up until recently, the belief that protests should be held in a peaceful and non-violent way has been widely spread across the world, even in communist countries such as China.

Despite huge efforts to suppress the freedom of speech and media, the Chinese government still felt challenged by the protest movements of recent years. The outbreak of the Tiananmen Incident within a decade of the Qing dynasty being overthrown by the Xinhai revolution of 1911 is a typical example. As students at elite universities in Beijing saw the new Republic of China government as weak, especially in its response to the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War One, they co-opted into a broader "May Fourth Movement" (fused with a more intellectual cause to reject traditional

Confucian culture) that called for radical political changes in China. Over 3000 of them marched to Tiananmen Square shouting slogans and burning the residence of an official they saw as culpable, ‘challenging’ the government in power. The student leadership which began the Tiananmen protests in April 1989 never directly called for an overthrow of the Communist Party, but rather for top leaders to step down, and for those more receptive to political reform to take over.

Despite splits within the party, those in power took a hard line against the occupation of Tiananmen Square, ultimately resulting in the bloody crackdown that killed several hundred demonstrators, many of them students. The survivors of the protest could never forget that day, one of the most disastrous moments that they had encountered in Page 29

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

their lives. The dictatorial rule of the Chinese government was once again highlighted due to its suppressing of the 1989 Tiananmen Protest.

Opposition against any value or element of the government is never allowed. One does not even dare mentioning the word ‘protest’ in China, as he/she will most probably face prohibition from communicating with the rest of the world, prosecution, or even house imprisonment. This is China, where the governing party rules over everything. This is where the government constantly fears the eventuality that a protest movement may become so powerful as to overthrow their rule.

The Hong Kong July 1 Marches are an annual protest rally originally led by the Civil Human Rights Front since the 1997 handover on the HKSAR establishment day, which clearly reflect the power of the common masses to demand changes in society. The 2003 march has proven to be one of the most remarkable and largest protests of them all. Half a million citizens took to the streets, opposing the legislation of Basic Law (i.e the constitution of Hong Kong, Article 23) and expressing their Page 30

happening of SARS earlier in the year. It forced the government to back down on the proposal because it lacked the necessary votes to pass it. As a result of the protest, the introduction of the Article 23 legislation was temporarily shelved. It was the first time since the 1997 handover that the Hong Kong government had suffered a defeat. It definitely set a precedent (although not in law), to the minds of people in Hong Kong. Since then, they have maintained a belief that by protesting, by striking for what they want, the government could no longer ignore the opinions of the people. From 2003

held every year, rationally and peacefully by citizens of Hong Kong, as a channel to demand democracy, universal suffrage, rights of minorities, protection of the freedom of speech and a variety of other political concerns.

However, fearing the slipping away of the freedoms promised to them under the ‘one country, two systems’ formula introduced after the handover in 1997, citizens of Hong Kong then decided to initiate a large scale protest, hoping to prevent communist rule in Hong Kong in the near future. 28th September 2014 marked the beginning of this historical

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

event—the Umbrella Movement, the Day when Hong Kong Cried. The failure of the Hong Kong police in using tearing gas to drive away large crowds of pro-democracy protestors in Admiralty rallied more people to the cause. The use of ‘umbrellas’ by the protestors as a shield from the continuous use of tear gas by police was how the name of the movement came to be. Tens of thousands of Hong Kong residents, young and old, rich and poor, have peacefully occupied major thoroughfares across the city, demanding ‘true universal suffrage’ and the resignation of hugely unpopular Chief Executive CY Leung. It was the

largest demonstration on Chinese soil since the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest. The scale of the current protests has thus invited comparisons.

Many regarded the movement to be ‘the Mini-Tiananmen’, a repeat of 4 June 1989. Violence between the police and protestors had been seen during the driving away of protestors in Causeway Bay, and the beating of protestors by wielding batons and pepper spray in Mongkok. Nonetheless, it failed to gain a large degree of support from the international community, especially from the US, which proclaims itself to be ‘The Leader of the Democratic World’. Although the movement started to lose its support after 70 odd days and the Chinese government claimed victory after police dismantled the main protest camp on 15th December, it certainly rang the bell for student involvement in future protest movements. The protest also brought the problems underlying the city of Hong Kong to the surface, such as the widening income inequality, rocketing property prices, regions being ‘over-flooded’ by mainland tourists, ever-increasing cost of living and the lack of

opportunities.

Commentators suggest that the protest presented to the government the socio-economic problems that Hong Kong has been encountering in recent years. Despite the failure to achieve the aims of the ‘Umbrella Movement’, the protest has been able to demonstrate the unity of the Hong Kong community and once again, forced the Chinese government to rethink its governing policy over this special administrative region.

Since the twentieth century, protests have been seen as a way to demand change and to express discontent towards the leader of the region. While I have focused only on the protest movements that have taken place in China and Hong Kong in recent years, these can be treated as microcosms of the wider world, where the outbreak of demonstrations can either end up in partial success or complete failure.

However, whilst remaining under the rule of the Communist Party, Hong Kong, and even China, will not be able to aspire for large scale political, social and economic changes without the consent of the Beijing government.

Page 31

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

[技術文] [足球台]

香港足球 何去

October 28th, 2015 The Freelance Guy

如果叫各位讀者舉出香港最 有成就既運動，我地呢一輩 可能首先會諗到單車，滑浪 風帆、桌球呢類我地曾經係 國際舞台上有表現既運動， 又或者係香港舉辦既大規模 賽事，例如香港國際七人欖 球賽同奧運馬術項目，不過 應該唔會有好多人即刻聯想 起大家都好鍾意既足球。

講到香港足球，其實我地都 有唔少威水史。近年既大家 最熟悉既應該就係零九年係 東亞運動會贏日本隊奪金， 再早d我地都曾經創造過世界 上最快既入球；咸豐年前亦 有全亞洲第一位到歐洲最頂 級聯賽踢球的足球員，全亞 洲第一個擁有職業足球聯賽 等等，可想言之香港曾經係 亞洲足球史上佔有一個舉足 輕重既地位。 不過，今日唔係想同大家「 想當年」，今日係想同大家 講下香港足球近三十年最令 人振奮既消息。

(以下將係技術文 無興趣可直 接跳過~） 我諗大家都唔會未聽過世界 杯啦，而我地香港隊而家正 正就係香港足球史近三十年 Page 32

最接近晉級世界杯既一刻。 首先等我講少少世界杯既晉 級制度啦~

而香港而家就係第二輪既第 二位，將有機會以小組頭四 名身份晉級下一回合。

跟住我地11月12號打馬爾代 夫 （勝算較大），重頭戲係 17號打中國，最後下年三月

對卡塔爾（勝算較細）。中 國餘下賽程包括對我地香港 隊、不丹、馬爾代夫（應該 贏到）同卡塔爾 （勝算較細 ）。以以上粗略估計，香港 同中國隊將會以17號果場波 決定小組次名席位。

何

何從?

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

中國隊係本屆亞洲區既種子 球隊，相反香港只係最後一 個檔次 （最低排名果堆球隊 ），雖然兩隊實力縣殊，但 歷史上香港亦試過係類似情 況下擊敗國足 追索返三十年前，中港兩地 足球曾經有一「五一九之役 」－ 1985年5月19日，當年 既香港隊身處亞洲區第二輪 外圍賽最後一輪，對旅亞洲 強隊中國 － 中國隊只要係同 香港隊打和就可以出線下輪 ，相反香港就一定要打贏。 過程唔多講（可以睇返當年 精華 https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=cR5Yaxnamd4 ） ，最後香港隊作客贏中國2： 1，晉級外圍賽第三圈。 香港隊可以係世界杯行到呢 步其實已經超額完成任務， 有說係香港足球發展計劃既 收成期；大家不防睇睇香港 近年對足球界既支援: 港足於2009年東亞運歷史性 奪金後，本地足運發展引起 香港市民關注，港府為左振 興本地球市，於2010年3月 發表「鳳凰計劃」，決定改 革香港球壇並有條件向足總 撥取更多款項(6000萬港紙)

，當中包括開拓新財政來源 以資助本港代表隊、研究新 既基層發展計劃同成立一個 全新特許營運既職業聯賽 (係 ，雖然以前香港都有職業聯 賽不過極其混亂，可以降左 班唔算數)，為期4年。

至於成效係點，自己睇圖啦 唉。 在受到圈內外既反對同一片 爭議聲下，政府又再拍板加 碼落新既五年足球發展計劃( 每年2000萬港紙)，定下包括 以香港足球代表隊於5至10年 內躋身至世界排名前100名( 而家排153，而排129既北韓 已經係可以參加世界杯決賽 周既水平)、香港超級聯賽5 年內將賽事平均入座率提高 至3,500人(而而家只係1000 人)等為成功指標。

筆者自己認為，鳳凰計劃等 既足球發展項目，有兩點好 值得各界反思： 一係政府對足球，以及整個 體育界發展既思維同想法。 政府係體育發展方面好多時 Page 33

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

趣班又係為左升學，十八般 武藝無樣精，然後就入大學 ，做野，升職，安穩退休， 當中可能就有好多有才華既 足球員被埋沒 (可閱 http://www.thenewslens.co m/post/4166/)，因為足球 員呢條路係香港實在太崎嶇 ，香港生活指數又高，球員 生涯入息又低 (去到香港隊級 數平均薪金都係兩萬左右， 最高約八萬)，退休後又無保 障，令到好多年青球員卻步 。政府淨係放錢，然後就覺 得自己任務完成，有得個計 劃同班球員自生自滅，咁樣 做真係可以改善香港足球青 訓發展咩？

都仲只係維持於投放左資源 ，若干年後就會有收穫，好 似數學公式咁既想法。唔係 話唔岩，投放多d資源的確係 可以為運動員帶來更多設備 同支援，有助佢地發展，但 係成件事係咪只係咁簡單？ 顯然唔係。以香港足球界做 例子，政府做左既就只係放 低6000 萬同設立左d框架， 就係咁多，整個鳳凰計劃直 情係零監管、零透明度。 (詳 見 https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=eq0oGb3WxsA) 結 果d錢去左邊？香港足球總會 Page 34

結構改革咪改到成個足總都 係經理級職員，人人幾萬蚊 人工囉！最基本既球隊想練 波都無球場，咁點踢？點進 步？政府肯放錢落足球投資 未來係無錯，但更重要係定 期既成效檢討，針對性作出 改善(例如無球場就起(唔係淨 係講)。另一個問題導至香港 足球好難進步係根本無年青 球員肯做全職球員。球員生 涯好短，最多都係二十年， 咁跟住點？ 以香港呢片福地，小朋友返 學為考試，一日返十幾個興

第二就係香港球迷既心態； 當然，呢到我唔係指所有球 迷，但係香港的而且確係缺 乏一班忠實球迷 – 呢樣可以 從外隊訪港作賽時既觀眾席 睇得出 – 支持外隊既球迷遠 比支持香港隊既多 – 從最近 既阿根廷，到之前既英超熱 身賽，到以前對巴西等強隊 ，香港隊看台人數寥寥可數 。 (http://www.goalgoalgoal.ne t/redirect.php?tid=289614& goto=lastpost) 多得一班勝利 球迷，香港隊出賽士氣都唔 會好，連自己人都唔撐自己 。悉逢今次外圍賽要打中國 隊，球迷籍住中港矛盾大力 支持香港隊打贏中國，果然 士氣大增，連挫國足同其他 球隊銳氣，而面對高幾班既 卡塔爾都打出士氣波，僅僅 輸一球。 港足成績可喜可賀，但有兩 點想各位留意返：一：究竟 一連串既好表現，係香港青 訓既收成，定係只係因為同

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

中國同組而打出既士氣波； 二：如果香港隊輸波，係咪 所有球迷又會迅間消息，香 港足球又變返無人理，無人 管既局面？筆者希望無論政 府同球迷都可以襯香港足球 隊仲係各位焦點之下時，好 好諗一下香港足球未來何去 何從。

P s. 希望HKPASS 可以係17 號book間房搞個活動一齊睇 波，youtube 會有直播 :P

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.co m/sports/art/20151019/19 338712

Page 35

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

WHAT’S HAPPENING IN LONDON? Page 36

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

WINTERVILLE 2015 Victoria Park 26 Nov - 23th Dec Features: ice rink, Santa's grotto and a circus, plus a pantomime of Snow White, and the Winter Night Garden, an indoor cinema

UNDERGROUND FILM CLUB IS BACK! Waterloo Vaults 11 - 29 Nov Tickets ÂŁ15 and sold out quickly!

Screenings: Benedict Cumberbatch in Hamlet, Amy, the documentary about Amy Winehouse, and Spice World, Toy Story, Up and Inside Out, and more at undergroundfilmclub.com

Page 37

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM South Kensington 29 Oct - 3 Jan Price: Adult from £12.65

CANARY WHARF Canada Square Park 31 Oct - 27 Feb Price: Adult £14.95

BROADGATE 16 Nov - 25 Feb Price: Adult £13

SOMERSET HOUSE Fortnum & Mason Rink 18 Nov - 10 Jan

Page 38

Prices: Regular skating from £8.85-£16.10/Club Nights £17/Skate School £17-£22. Free entry to Fortnum's Lodge and The Christmas Arcade.

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

WINTER WONDERLAND Hyde Park 20 Nov - 3 Jan Price: Adult £10.50-£14.50

TOWER OF LONDON 20 Nov - 4 Jan Price: Adult £12-£14

HAMPTON COURT PALACE 20 Nov - 4 Jan Price: Adult £11.50-£13

JW3 CENTRE Finchley Road 6 Dec - 10 Jan Price: Adult £12.50

Page 39

PASS-On Monthly | Oct 2015

The ďŹ rst step towards change is awareness.

- Nathaniel Branden

Page 40

LSESU HKPASS is a politically neutral society and any views expressed belong entirely to the author themselves.