-
-
新聞稿,焦點
-
新民黨 全力支持特區政府 展開《基本法》23條諮詢工作
新民黨 全力支持特區政府 展開《基本法》23條諮詢工作
日期︰2024 年 1 月 30 日
對於特區政府今日(30日)宣布展開《基本法》23條公眾諮詢,新民黨表示歡迎,及將全力支持。
維護國家安全、為《基本法》23條自行立法,是香港特別行政區的憲制責任,本就責無旁貸。2003年未能成功立法,讓特區的維護國家安全法律存在漏洞,亦讓外部勢力及反中亂港分子有機可乘,終引發2014年違法佔中、2019年黑暴等動盪,出現過非常嚴重的破壞國家安全行為,也讓很多香港人一度失去應有的生活自由。2003年距今二十一年,在中央政府為香港訂立《香港國安法》及特區政府的持續努力後,社會已歸平靜,新民黨認為目前是為23條立法的理想時機,同時相信市民充分理解今次立法的必要性,亦樂見今屆特區政府展示其解氣及擔當,將全力配合。
黨主席葉劉淑儀說:「今次的立法建議非常詳細,並且參考了其他國家的國家安全法例,立法建議比我在2002年處理的時候,更加完善。今次新增了一些罪行,例如叛亂罪,美國是有的;破壞行為罪,英國是有的。這些都是因為2019年的黑暴,我們見到很多重要的政府設施遭破壞,同時延續了七、八個月的嚴重暴力行為,當時並非一般的騷亂,而是希望顛覆政府的,因此,為了維護國家安全,我很認同特區政府新增這些罪行。」
「有其他立法建議是延續以往的內容,例如叛國罪有列明只適用於中國籍人士,豁免外國人,這點是特區政府在2002年諮詢的時候,接受了外國商會的意見。」葉太續道。
另外,新民黨留意到,有傳媒提出可否以公眾利益作辯解。今日會議上,保安局局長鄧炳強已說明,當涉及重大公眾利益而干犯未經授權披露國家機密,是可以考慮以公眾利益作為辯解的。
最後,新民黨認同行政長官李家超所說,立法是「心須做」,而且要「盡快做」,以應對嚴峻的地緣政治風險及瞬息萬變的國際局勢。目前特區政府訂定公眾諮詢期由即日起至2月28日,新民黨認為適合。就此,新民黨六位立法會議員、二十六位區議員,聯同全黨上下,將積極配合特區政府的諮詢工作,全力向市民解說,讓社會清楚了解立法內容,同時讓特區政府理解市民的想法,讓社會對條文達致共識。新民黨立法會議員將全力以赴,盡責履職,認真審議條例內容,讓香港特別行政區能盡快履行其憲制責任,切實維護國家安全。
|
|
Like it or not, Chinese ‘boys’ love’ fiction is popular in the West
文章
The op-ed, “How to tell China’s story” (July 14), misses an important genre which has gained growing popularity in the West and is far more telling of life in contemporary China than decades-old titles like Life and Death in Shanghai or Wild Swans.
I am referring to the internet fiction genre of danmei. Danmeiis a term which originated in Japan. This new genre has given rise to many phenomenally successful internet novels that have been turned into wildly popular Chinese television drama series and spawned English translations. An outstanding example is Grandmaster of Demonic Cultivation: Mo Dao Zu Shi, which was turned into a Chinese drama series, The Untamed, in 2019, translated into English and made available on Amazon. The Untamed catapulted two young actors, Xiao Zhan and Wang Yibo, to superstardom in China. Another highly successful publication is The Husky and His White Cat Shizun, the English version of which was on The New York Times’ bestselling list. The English version has such a wide following in the West that paperback editions are available.
Danmei novels celebrate “boys’ love” which is frowned on by the authorities. Immortality, a big-budget Chinese drama series produced by Tencent and based on The Husky, has been put on hold. But the genre continues to have a cult following in China and overseas, inspiring fan art, fan fiction and merchandise.
A lot of boys’ love internet novels were written by women for women. Why are they so popular with women in China? Their popularity reflects the frustration of contemporary Chinese women caught between the traditional, pragmatic, family-first concept of marriage and their yearnings for romance and true love as glorified in danmei fiction. Such fiction has become their channel for fantasy and escapism. Surprisingly the novels have also struck a chord with Western audiences.
While drama series based on such fiction have been banned, animated versions of some popular titles continue to be produced. The resilience of this genre, decried by the authorities as a lowbrow deviation from the officially sponsored “main melody” productions, reflects a subtle, ongoing tussle between the authorities and creative artists. Most of the time the authorities win, but the bans have not stopped private enterprise and creative genius from finding room for this genre to flourish. Call it the “one eye open, one eye shut” attitude of the authorities?
|
|
盛事貴精不貴多 / Quality is more important than quantity for mega-events
文章
特區政府自去年開始推動盛事經濟,希望透過舉辦及支持國際級大型盛事(mega events),吸引高增值旅客訪港,加強本港旅遊業的競爭力,提振經濟。
根據政府提供的盛事年表,香港在2024 年全年將舉辦多達數百項大型盛事,數量之龐大,不禁讓人臆想,這些活動真的能稱得上是「盛事」嗎?
現時,對國際級大型盛事較主流的定義源自蘇黎世大學在2015 年一篇論文中提出的標準。作者認為一項盛事活動的訪客人數(visitor attractiveness)、轉播收益(mediated reach)、活動成本(cost)及對城市基建規劃的影響(urban transformation)都要達到一定規模才能定義為國際級大型盛事。
按照上述定義,如Taylor Swift 及其他國際級巨星舉辦的巡迴演唱會,或像 LIV Golf 巡迴賽和國家七人欖球賽等大型體育賽事都屬於國際級大型盛事。但規模如此龐大的活動,涉及海量的前期籌備工作,對場地亦有一定要求,每年能舉辦一至兩場已是不易。
反觀盛事年表所羅列的活動,不少活動或規模太小,或目標客群太窄,有些只是行業展覽,難以吸引境外旅客訪港,實在不能稱之為盛事。更令人嘆息的是,特區政府為不少「盛事」提供了資助,但這些活動本身的吸金能力相當有限,非但不能振興消費市道,反而導致公帑打了水漂。
以今年2 月舉辦的「Chubby Hearts Hong Kong」為例,政府慷慨地資助主辦方780 萬港元,但對活動的討論始終只停留在本地的媒體間,並未引起境外媒體關注,遑論吸引旅客訪港。
雖然政府推動盛事經濟的政策初衷良好,但這些所謂盛事屢次甩碌出醜,加上現時財政緊絀,政府應重新檢視成效。長遠而言,我認為政府應放棄「廣撒網、多斂魚」的思維,集中資助有真正吸金能力的盛事,避免再次「倒錢落海」。
Quality is more important than quantity for mega-eventsSince last year, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has been promoting the mega-events economy, hoping to attract high-yielding visitors to Hong Kong through hosting and supporting international mega-events, strengthen the competitiveness of the local tourism industry, and boost the economy.
According to the event calendar provided by the government, Hong Kong will host over hundreds of major events throughout 2024. The massive scale prompts wonder - can these activities truly be called "mega-events"?
Currently, the more mainstream definition of international mega-events comes from criteria proposed in a 2015 paper by University of Zurich. It argued that the visitor attractiveness, mediated reach, cost and impact on urban planning of an event need to reach a certain scale to be defined as an international mega-event.
According to these definitions, concerts by Taylor Swift and other international megastars, or large-scale sporting events like the LIV Golf Tour and National Seven-a-Side Rugby would constitute international mega-events. However, events of such scale involve tremendous preparation work and have certain venue requirements - it would already be difficult to host one to two annually.
In contrast, many events listed in the calendar have either too small a scale, narrow target audience or are simply trade exhibitions, failing to attract foreign visitors to Hong Kong and not qualifying as mega-events. More regrettably, the SAR government has subsidized numerous "mega-events" but their ability to generate revenue is limited, instead of stimulating consumption they divert public funds.
Taking "Chubby Hearts Hong Kong" in February as an example, the government generously funded the organizer $7.8 million HKD but discussion around the event was confined locally, without catching foreign media attention much less attracting tourists.
While the mega-events economic policy intent is sound, these so-called events have repeatedly underdelivered. With fiscal austerity, the government should re-evaluate effectiveness. In the long run, relying less on a scattergun approach and concentrating resources on events with genuine revenue-generating ability could prevent further waste of public money.
|
|
英國制度缺點的完美體現 / The Perfect Embodiment of the Flaws in the British System
文章
前文提到,工黨議員韋雅蘭(Angela Rayner)憑高中輟學學歷成為新一任英國副首相,引來外界的關注。回顧歷史,英國歷屆政府只有8 位首相未獲得大學學位,而韋雅蘭更是唯一一位學歷為高中輟學的副首相。
有支持者認為,韋雅蘭能透過選舉一躍成為英國政府的二把手,既體現了民主制度中「主權在民」(popular sovereignty)的核心理念,亦證明了即使階級制度森嚴如英國,基層人民仍可憑藉自己的才能實現向上流動,反映出英式民主制度的優越性。但我認為韋雅蘭的任命非但未能體現英國政制的優點,反而進一步揭示了其制度的缺陷。
英國選舉採用單議席單票制,每個選區只有一個議席並以多數制決定勝負。在多黨競爭的情况下,很容易出現候選人在未獲得多數票的情况下當選。加上英國是按註冊選民數量,而非實際人口數量去劃分選區,導致選舉結果更容易向兩大黨傾斜。在這種扭曲選制下誕生的議員是否真的具有民意授權,是個值得商榷的問題。其次,英國內閣大臣的任命除考慮議員自身能力外,亦取決於其在政黨內的站隊,投機成分相當大。
韋雅蘭之所以能在2015 年首次進入下議院後,在翌年就迅速獲任命為影子內閣大臣,主要得益於她在2016 年工黨內訌時堅定站隊時任黨魁郝爾彬。實際上,英國政界都對韋雅蘭的晉升速度之快感到驚奇。當她在2023 年9 月影子內閣重組時獲委任為影子副首相一事,就引起了外界的激烈討論。
不過,副首相本身僅是一個非常設職務,任命與否全憑首相意願。由於沒有法定權力,副首相的實質權力及職能往往會視乎擔任者而有所差異,其主要職務更多時候是代替首相前往下議院接受議員質詢,屬於無所任大臣(minister without portfolio)的一種。我相信韋雅蘭是由於缺乏足夠的專業知識去處理其他部門的工作,才獲委任為副首相。
當一國的副首相是由一位才幹未受考驗,又無足夠民意授權的議會新兵擔任,又如何能顯示出英國的制度優勢?
The Perfect Embodiment of the Flaws in the British System
As mentioned earlier, Labour Party member Angela Rayner became the new UK Deputy Prime Minister with only a secondary education background, drawing public attention. Looking back in history, only 8 out of the UK's prime ministers did not have a university degree, while Rayner is the only deputy prime minister with an educational background of dropping out of high school.
Some supporters believe that Rayner's ability to rise through elections to become the UK government's second-in-command embodies the core idea of "popular sovereignty" in a democratic system, and proves that even in a strictly class-based system like the UK, grassroots people can still achieve upward mobility through their own abilities, reflecting the superiority of the British democratic system. However, I believe Rayner's appointment does not demonstrate the advantages of the UK political system, but further reveals its flaws.
The UK uses the single-seat single-vote constituency system for elections, with each constituency having only one seat decided by plurality voting. In a multi-party competition environment, candidates can easily win without obtaining a majority of votes. Coupled with the UK delineating constituencies based on registered voter numbers rather than actual population, the election results are more likely to tilt towards the two major parties. Whether MPs elected under such a distorted electoral system truly have a mandate from the people is debatable.
Furthermore, the appointment of UK cabinet ministers depends not only on the individual's capabilities but also on their positioning within the political party, with a high degree of opportunism.
The main reason Rayner was able to be appointed as a shadow cabinet minister in 2016, just a year after first entering the House of Commons in 2015, was because of her staunch support of then Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn during the Labour infighting in 2016. Actually, the speed of Rayner's rise surprised many in UK politics.
When she was appointed as Shadow Deputy Prime Minister in September 2023 during a reshuffle of the Shadow Cabinet, it sparked intense public discussion.
However, the role of Deputy Prime Minister itself is a non-permanent position determined by the Prime Minister's discretion. Due to its lack of statutory powers, the actual authority and functions of the Deputy Prime Minister can vary depending on the individual, with the main duties often being to replace the Prime Minister in responding to questions from MPs in the House of Commons - equivalent to a minister without portfolio. I believe Rayner was appointed as Deputy Prime Minister because she lacked sufficient professional knowledge to handle work in other departments.
How can the appointment of a deputy prime minister of a country who is an inexperienced new MP without sufficient democratic mandate demonstrate the advantages of the UK system?
|
|