【明報專訊】HENRY TANG and Leung Chun-ying have resigned their public offices so that they can consider whether to stand for Chief Executive (CE) and prepare for their electioneering. They have busied themselves with going to various districts, attending forums and talking about their ideas and policy directions. When they mention specific policies, they seem intent on endearing themselves to certain groups.
Candidates have to make political pledges to drum up support. However, only the 1,200 Election Committee members will have the vote. It is certainly wrong for any CE aspirant to make "policy cheques" out to Election Committee members in exchange for their support.
This administration has handed out many "candies" since 2007. Not long ago, it decided to pay every permanent resident aged above eighteen $6,000. The handouts it has made total nearly $200 billion. They may have made CE Donald Tsang and the SAR government a bit less unpopular, but we do not see Hong Kong has in any way become better. Tang and Leung should learn from its mistakes. Efforts to use public resources effectively to find long-term, targeted solutions to problems in such areas as education, healthcare and services for the elderly are worth support, for they would benefit society as a whole. However, neither Tang nor Leung has openly displayed such drive.
Nevertheless, advantages have been promised and "policy cheques" made out. At a Heung Yee Kuk meeting with village representatives, Tang suggested that the government should consider relaxing the 3-storey restriction in respect of New Territories exempted houses (NTEHs) and allowing indigenous villagers to build 1-storey or 2-storey NTEHs with a larger floor area and to "pool their rights" to put up 6-storey or 9-storey "small houses". Indigenous villagers want NTEH restrictions lifted. The changes Tang suggested at the meeting are precisely what they crave. One may expect the small house policy will drastically change if he becomes CE.
Were he to fight a CE election in which all citizens would vote, he would have to face several million voters, and he might have advised himself against suggesting what would enlarge indigenous villagers' privilege. Legislator Lee Wing-tat has said Tang wants to buy votes with his proposal to relax the NTEH height restriction. The Heung Yee Kuk will control 28 Election Committee seats. In the light of this and the right peculiar to indigenous villagers, what seems puzzling is explainable.
This is what is wrong with the small-circle election. If advantage bartering determines the outcome of the next CE election, it will be abundantly clear how hideous the small-circle election is. What happened at the Kuk meeting has indeed aroused suspicions that, when a CE aspirant canvasses people or interests behind closed doors, he may put their interests before the Hong Kong people's.
Now the CE aspirants have to drum up popular support. If the Election Committee elects a person CE whom citizens scorn, the exercise will seem ugly, and it will be doubtful that he can effectively run the territory. Having no right to vote, citizens can only monitor the election indirectly. As a media organisation, we have to do our duty of scrutiny. We would like to offer the CE aspirants two pieces of advice.
(1) They must not recklessly make out policy cheques to ingratiate themselves with citizens.
(2) All policies must be aimed at benefiting the more than seven million Hong Kong citizens. No policy should be designed to advantage any particular individuals, interests or privileged groups.
明報社評 2011.10.26﹕唐梁勿亂開施政支票 防墮小圈子選舉陷阱
唐英年和梁振英辭去公職、「考慮參選、備選」行政長官之後，積極落區、出席論壇，講理念、講施政方向，一些議題觸及具體政策考量，有討好利益團體之嫌。
選舉政治免不了有政治承諾，以爭取支持，但是特首選舉只有1200名選舉委員有投票權，若參選人以施政支票換取選委支持，肯定不妥。
現屆政府2007年以來多次「派糖」，連今年給每名18歲以上永久居民派6000元，已經耗費接近2000億元，花了如此巨款，或許對特首曾蔭權和政府民望稍有幫助，整體社會卻不見有任何積極改善。所以，唐英年和梁振英應引以為鑑。若能善用公共資源，有針對性地長遠解決教育、醫療、安老等惠及全民的問題，值得支持，然而，唐梁二人迄今在公開場合，仍未見顯示這種大魄力。
反而，另一種派利益、政治支票，卻是接連出現，其中唐英年在鄉議局出席村代表大會時，建議放寬丁屋3層高度限制，改為可建1至2層，每層面積較大，或在同一土地集合多個丁權，建6層甚至9層。原居民一直想衝破丁屋政策規限，唐英年這個取向，與原居民所思所欲精神契合，他一旦當選執政，丁屋政策大變可期。
設若唐英年參加特首普選，要面對全港數百萬選民，這種利好原居民特權的建議，或許要另行衡量了。立法會議員李永達評論唐英年的放寬丁屋高度限制建議，認為是「買票」。原來鄉議局在選舉委員會有28票，若把原居民特權與此掛鈎，一些事態就可以得到解釋。
這是小圈子選舉之弊，不過，若利益交換決定這次特首選舉結果，則小圈子選舉之醜惡將暴露無遺。從鄉議局村代表大會一幕，使人對小圈子選舉的閉門拉票，個人、利益團體的利益會否凌駕市民和香港利益，充滿了懸念。
在現階段，參選人必須爭取民意支持，若民意鄙棄的人，卻在選委會當選為特首，屆時不但難看，這樣的特首能否維持有效管治，也成疑問。市民無票，只能透過間接方式，關注或監察這次選舉，作為傳媒，盡言論監督之責，我們對於參選人，提出兩點：
（1）不要為討好市民而亂開政治支票；
（2）一應政策取向，要以服務700多萬市民為念，絕對不應該向特權，或為個人和利益集團傾斜。
Glossary
drive﹕a strong desire to do things and achieve something.
peculiar﹕A thing peculiar to a person belongs or relates to him and not to others.
put before﹕If you put A before B, you think A is more important than B.
ingratiate﹕If you ingratiate yourself with another, you do things to make the other like you.
網上聲檔: english.mingpao.com/critic.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment