Contents ...
udn網路城邦
跟白頂紅 -- 替敢在病態社會當官的人說幾句話
2013/08/06 23:05
瀏覽1,415
迴響17
推薦1
引用0

余沒作過考究,但相信恭喜發財這句新春祝賀語源出香港,在十多億人口的華語世界中也只在香港流行。發財與發達是很多香港人的夢想或目標。在過去數十年的大部分時間裡,香港富豪榜上之前列人物備受景仰與尊重。好像忽然之間香港社會的價觀發生了一百八十度的轉變:仇富、憎人富貴、發窮惡。貧富懸殊、跨代貧窮成為差不多最流行的政治正確議題。

為了吸引讀者看下去,首先來說點沒爭議性、可能並不廣為人知,且帶有激勵振奮的內容。話說40年前的1973年再倒數至1959年的14年間,有一個叫PLAN的國際慈善組織在香港設立事處中文名定為國際培幼會。PLAN成立於1937年,專門在世界上困難的地區幫助貧窮人家的兒童。香港於70年代經濟起飛,所以PLAN就沒在香港提供援助,倒過來現時只在香港進行募捐而把籌得的善款用在第三世界裡〖現時PLAN在中國服務的名稱為國際計劃(中國)〗。在PLAN於香港服務的早年,曾援助一個居於寮屋家庭的一名6歲男孩。兩年後這家庭獲得『上樓』環境改善了便停止受助。再過14年,這名男孩從中文大學會計系畢業。經過多年力爭上游,不單事業有成且更先後擔任會計師公會會長及非牟利青少年服務機構「突破」的主席,亦獲委任為太平紳士。這個真實的跨過『跨代貧窮』脫貧個案雖然傑出,卻不是絕無僅有。於2010年響應PLAN的『與贊助人會面』呼籲,這位正同時贊助5名貧童的前受助人帶同家人飛到美國親身向48年前每月贊助他7美元的美空軍Brown上尉及其太太道謝。余就是從傳媒的報導看到這個當時被標榜的脫貧模範個案。這名不再貧窮的人也像很多其他香港人一樣把賺到的錢投資在房地產。他踏踏實實建立的正面形象被他自己於2012年作的一個決定全給摧毀了!在今日極度病態的香港社會,他成了過街老鼠!

果你看過余之前的時事網誌,就知道余絕非狼粉。但余認為狼班子裡並非全部都是狐群狗黨,有相當一部分是真有心替香港社會做點實事的。先說麥齊光,大家可翻查一下記錄,在梁展文事件調查過程中披露過在政府循例『諮詢』各有關高官對應否批准其到新世界任職時,時為常秘的麥齊光是唯一提出梁展文曾參與紅灣半島居屋變私樓,如批准其任職新世界,可能成為敏感事件。其他與麥齊光同級或比他更高級的官員均持圍威喂心態而沒有理會麥齊光所提的意見。在當時余覺得麥齊光是個好官。20多年前兩名公務員互供對方的單位可能數以萬計,麥齊光之所以落得如此下場就是他當了局長。再說林奮強, 30多歲被政府委任為中央政策組非全職顧問,40多歲成為國際投資銀行的MD201150歲選擇退休並自資成立非牟利智庫「黃金50」,這決定已可看見其對金錢之價值觀。於2012年獲委任為行政局議員時他已申報在港擁有數十個物業,市值數億元。那些向廉署誣告他的反對黨政客說廉署不檢控他感到失望,若果廉署順他們意檢控他而其後法庭判他無罪,這些政客就會對法庭感到失望。林奮強售出於2001(接近谷底價)買入已持有11年的物業賬面賺了500多萬,一來數字合理,二來這宗物業交易只佔他持貨量的一小部分,試問為此而賠上他的名聲是否公道呢?

本文第二段述說的是陳茂波。他的遭遇與林奮強同樣的不公義。他清清楚楚的說『太太及家人』,首先被政府新聞處『幫他一把』在新聞稿上寫成太太及『其』家人。其後雖重新發稿澄清,很多電子傳媒也重播原來的錄音,但更多的無良傳媒及政客之後仍不停的屈他--說他把兒子說成是太太的家人,甚至拗橫折曲極度侮辱性地說兒子不是他生的。在1994年,即是他當官前18年,他太太名下的公司於新界買了在2012年市值才區區270萬權益的土地,叫他為囤地波的人他日在地府必受拔舌之刑才是天理昭昭。

陳茂波與林奮強完全符合現行遊戲規則(申報制度),他們錯在哪裡呢?答案恰恰就是個多星期前在垃圾會發展委員會上一名撐東北發展的新界土豪的發言裡。陳茂波與林奮強錯就錯在他們當官不是一窮二白卻有錢有樓更有地。幾年前陳啟宗說過一句至理名言:『香港是中國裡面最左的地方』。在老毛死後『無產階級專政』在大陸已無甚市場,在香港似乎指日可待矣。

後記:余拋磚引玉得到眾同學及各方好友積極回應,令內容豐富充實,蓬蓽生輝,十分感謝!因版面所限,較早的精彩回應已由網站安排為第二頁(包括蔡醫生之第一次回應、賀醫生的回應及余答复Gulliver第一次回應時所增補有關何建宗的個案)。請點擊畫面的右下方 (灰色的看本文的下一頁, 綠色的看下一篇文章)


 

 

有誰推薦more
全站分類:時事評論 政治
自訂分類:姑妄言之
上一則: 817 Rally 雜寫
下一則: 別矣鐵娘 Long Live Thatcherism
你可能會有興趣的文章:
迴響(17) :
7樓. Gary Chan
2013/08/08 19:47
Reply

Fully agree with your view - Gary Chan

6樓. wlzhang
2013/08/08 18:16
跟紅頂白
I fully endorse the views expressed by the author.
5樓. Anonymous
2013/08/08 18:16

茂波錯在他或至親在新界東北發展區有地, 也就是利益, 這樣參與領導東北發展, 不就是利益衝突嗎 ?


政府今日發出特首處理政治委任官員涉及潛在利益衝突和接受利益款待個案的指引,定義了何謂私人利益。

1.陳局長有就他太太所持利益向政府作了申報。所以他是遵從遊戲規則。制度是向政府/特首申報,制度不是(至少迄今不是)向傳媒申報。
2.申報了利益,是否有衝突,是由上級決定。試想想房屋局長,應該由擁有私房的人抑或無產的人來擔任呢。假設決定是多建公屋甚至只建公屋,如果局長是有樓者,可詬病他切斷私樓供應以提高他已擁有物業的價錢。如果局長是等著上樓無產者,則可譴責他只顧幫跟他處境相同的人快些上樓,而漠視欲置業者之意願。同一個政策,無論局長是何背景,他都肯定被罵得狗血淋頭。
3.當然今天或任何時候遊戲規則都有可能更改。人在江湖亦要跟隨,除非唔玩。
4.余的原文跟你的高見一樣,陳局長與林議員均錯在他們有樓有地。地主始終在黑五類裡排名第一,還高過反革命。如果他們一無所有,至少會得到香港差不多一半家庭的empathy認同。另一半的有產階級則沒資格發窮惡。不過,陳家的地在數以百億計的發展裡只佔不足3百萬。余讀中學時數學科教過"significant figures", 幾百億裡的幾百萬應該就絕不significant.

希望你能繼續指教。 zhangWL2013/08/09 11:18回覆
4樓. George
2013/08/08 14:43
just sharing
Dear gulliver n all
Just to share a small piece of my history, paul chan was my senior n actually my first teacher in audit work when i worked one summer with FS Li the acctg firm
Gulliver, were u there when paul chan doing summer work at fs?
Indeed paul was a very very nice, smart hard working guy!
Bad peer and friends? 遇人不淑!he did have a will to help n change for hk back in late 70s!
Still i think not the right one he should help
One more pt : My elder bro acted as one of the 2 referees for him when he applied for hkicpa membership
Nothing special still a good friend then
3樓. top boy
2013/08/08 11:54

When I was a naive young man , I often wonder how a catastrophic calamity like the cultural revolution could happen when so many supposedly mentally sound and  educated people could be whipped  into such  senseless  frenzy. Little would I imagine then that i will be face to face with one half a century later here in Hong Kong.

 Teacher freely abusing the  police with four lettered words was praised by the teachers' union;  university students who showed their behinds ( albeit with their pants still on )to the chancellor during graduation ceremony were condoned as doing the righteous thing, kidergarden manuels teaching children  to respect their country are accused of brain washing the kids,  No matter how ludicrous and far out  the accusations are. you can bet that there are always so called academics and commentators egging them on.

If one think about it,the saga involving Paul Chan , Franklin Lam and Mak Chai Kwong is just part of the ongoing cultural revolution a la Hong Kong. Just like the chinese cultural revolution was never about culture, the present one is targeted at cy Leung and its adminstration right from the get go. Its aim is to make HK so ungovernable as to force the hands of the central government

Call  me a conspiration junkie but I certainly dont want to be here where the showdown arrives say when the moronic "occupy central movement" commence.

As  an aside I wonder how many of our more 'democratically  inclined ' classmates will be there. Nah, just kidding.

2樓. Woo
2013/08/08 01:03

Cannot agree with you more. Hong Kong is sick. The ingredients for another cultural revolution is here

1.劏房户 (貧農)2.野心家(老毛)3. 學生(紅衛兵)4. 民主理想(共產主義). Hong Kong is too simple, sometimes naive. 

1樓. gulliver
2013/08/07 22:32
that is total robbery
1. If really the executive council was only told about the special stamp duty tax one day before its announcement, then the council is useless in helping the government to formulate   Such a significant fiscal policy that affect so many citizens of hk.
2. Northeast territory development project: the hk government will grab the land of private landowner for hk$950 per sq. ft  if the owner own less than 40,000 sq. ft of land.Some other land owner can sell for hk$22,000 psf if their land are bigger than 40,000 sf, because, in that case, the government will not grab their land n they can either sell it or develop the land themselves at 6.5 time plot ratio. With land premium and profit.
3. If mr chan combine his 20,000 sf land with his political assistant's another 20,000 sf, they can then sell it to other developer their total 40,000 sf of land for hk$900 million.

What kind of policy is that, that is totally robbery, hk is still the same, rob from the poor n enrich the rich n powerful, such as the village chief, the big developer n the policy maker together.

Gulliver,
i sud hv also mentioned the case of the PA of DB in the above article. to me, he appears equally innocent. as widely criticised, the "guidelines" announced today do not stipulate whether it's been newly amended/implemented or since before the current cabinet sworn in. it's obvious the act of Mr Ho transferring the property to his mother was a deliberate move before his taking up of the political appt. it only made sense he did so if the declaration of interest guidelines at the time did not incl one's parents. but in any case, the property has been family-owned for some 40 years & was not 囤積居奇 but continuously being used by the factory. it's purely speculative whether land owners of various sizes of plots can merge lands adjoined or otherwise, or whether & what acquisition price will be offerred. the development plan will undergo due process of consultation & numerous vettings by Legco.
once again, under the prolateriat ideology, Messrs Paul Chan & Henry Ho r surely guilty of being landowners. they sud thank heaven they r not in the midst of the red guards or the Bolsheviks.

zhangWL2013/08/07 23:45回覆
發表迴響

會員登入