研討會 : 關於香港“官商勾結”的一個實證研究
Supplementary Proposal on the Proposed Urban Renewal Strategy
遊行相片 - “七一向前走,香港前途在我手”
程翔講座:政改方案通過後香港政制發展的前景
Newsletter on Political Reform #8 政改通訊第八期
新聞稿 : 「偽普選 真倒退」 ─對喬曉陽政改講話的回應
新民主運動第二波研討會
Talk : “Genesis of Himalayan Consensus” by Mr. Laurence Brahm
Newsletter on Political Reform #7 政改通訊第七期
自製「反對功能組別」海報
香港市民致功能組別 : 5.16我哋不再啞忍 站出來 用行動請你哋消失
功能組別致全港蟻民 : 請繼續沉默 繼續和諧
Photo Gallery – March for Universal Suffrage on 2 May
Member Activities – Travel Sharing : Journey to Israel – A Modern Odyssey
Newsletter on Political Reform #6 政改通訊第六期
Newsletter on Political Reform #5 政改通訊第五期
終極普選團結大會 – 4 月 25 日(星期日)
「我在中國」(Co-China)之九:從反高鐵看跨境正義
Newsletter on Political Reform #4 政改通訊第四期
公共專業聯盟對《二零一二年行政長官及立法會產生辦法建議方案》的回應
Newsletter on Political Reform #3 政改通訊第三期
Press Statement : The Professional Commons urge HK people to cast their votes on May 16
Newsletter on Political Reform #2 政改通訊第二期
Newsletter on Political Reform #1 政改通訊第一期
新聞稿 : 針對「八成門檻」的四帖解藥 – 公共專業聯盟對修訂舊樓強拍條例的意見 (16-3-2010)
“Rehabilitation-based” “People’s First” – Wing Lee Street Regeneration Proposal
Professional Commons supports Earth Hour 2010
「反侵權 反迫遷」說明會
Donald: Time to review the Land Policy! 特首: 土地政策有問題!
Ensure the Financial Security of the Elderly Research – Report on Universal Old Age Pension Scheme
Responses from The Professional Commons Regarding the “Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive and for Forming the Legislative Council in 2012” Consultation Document
「高鐵角力:香港學懂了甚麽?」
Consultative Forum on Constitutional Reform for the IT and Engineering Sectors
[Hong Kong Interchange Option] – A cheaper, faster and better Express Rail Link
Joint Petition from EC Members, Professionals and Academics
For the People, By the People – Research Report on the Urban Regeneration Strategy
Hong Kong Civil Society Delegation to Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change Position Paper
EC Declaration on Political Accountability
Procommons in Media (Sep 2009)
E-Newsletter 2009 (August Issue)
“China’s Conscience and Public Opinions Online” – The 3rd Talk
梁繼昌﹕ 伊斯蘭金融「講」
莫乃光﹕ 由「人民西九」至「科技西九」
莫乃光﹕ 校本驗毒:「家長式」干預自由
Important Notice: Website Revamp
Seminar National Human Rights Action Plan in the PRC – A reality or a propaganda?
Seminar: The Quality Living Circle of the Green Greater Pearl River Delta: Starting from Hong Kong
Pro-Activity: Wine Tasting Gathering

新聞稿 : 「偽普選 真倒退」 ─對喬曉陽政改講話的回應

Chinese Only 中文

新民主運動第二波研討會

Chinese Only 中文

Talk : “Genesis of Himalayan Consensus” by Mr. Laurence Brahm

The Professional commons has a great honor to invite Mr. Laurence Brahm to give a talk on “Genesis of Himalayan Consensus”.  To learn more about the Himalayan Consensus, please refer to the link http://www.laurencebrahm.com/himalayan-consensus/himalayan-consensus

Laurence Brahm is a global activist, international mediator, political columnist and author. He is the leading advocate of a fresh development paradigm – The Himalayan Consensus – an innovative approach to development. The Himalayan Consensus emphasizes empowering people with local pragmatism in place of broad sweeping globalized ideology and theory. If you have interest to come, please register by the following link.

Detail
Date: 24th May 2010
Time: 5:00pm
Venue: Room B6605, City University of Hong Kong (Kowloon Tong Campus)
Topic: Genesis of Himalayan Consensus
Language: English

Profile of the speaker : Laurence Brahm

clip_image002

Member of The United Nations Theme Group on Poverty and Inequality, Laurence Brahm is a global activist, international mediator, political columnist and author. He is the leading advocate of a fresh development paradigm – The Himalayan Consensus – an innovative approach to development. The Himalayan Consensus emphasizes empowering people with local pragmatism in place of broad sweeping globalized ideology and theory.

The Himalayan Consensus evolved from Brahm’s years embedded as a central government advisor in Vietnam and Laos in the early 1990s, during which Brahm vociferously opposed the “shock therapy” policy prescriptions of the Washington Consensus. During these years, Brahm drafted the overarching financial reforms and accompanying policy legislation that led to economic take-off and continues to serve as the development framework for these countries to this day. Two decades later, Vietnam and Laos are examples of the success of Brahm’s policy advice, in contrast to the graveyard status of the “shock therapy” method.

Brahm went on to advise Cambodia, Mongolia and ultimately China’s economic tsar, former Premier Zhu Rongji, during the critical years that Zhu supervised China’s transition from planned to market economy, creating the economic miracle China has today. A member of the inner circle of Zhu’s economic advisors and a trusted personal friend to several of China’s leaders, advice provided by Brahm was regularly sought behind China’s state-owned enterprise, banking, and monetary reforms that paved the way for China’s entry into the WTO in 2001. During these years, Brahm coined the “China Century” theory which juxtaposed the doomsday “China Collapse” view held by certain scholars in the West. Brahm also documented the reforms that he personally witnessed in his biography of Zhu.

Following China’s entry into the WTO in 2001, Brahm considered his work on economic and monetary reform policy in Beijing to be finished, as the reform process would now be magnetized by global integration through the WTO as opposed to being driven by policy decision-making of individual leaders.

Brahm shifted his focus from coastal China to the western regions, moving to the Himalayan Plateau and seeking alternative economic experiences relevant to rural poverty alleviation and environmental protection as opposed to urban industrialization. At this point, Brahm’s previous work as alternative developmental advocate evolved into that of a global activist.

Since 2002, Brahm has refused any further engagements with multinational corporations as investment advisor and strategist and moved from Beijing to Lhasa, where he began an extensive program of heritage building restoration, microequity empowerment for marginalized women and the handicapped, medical outreach programs (including establishing clinics in monasteries and campaigns to rid blindness among nomadic and poor populations), and the first free education Montessori school in the Tibet Autonomous Region.

Brahm’s extensive writing and film documentation of experiences on the Tibetan Plateau during the years 2002-2006 emerged in a book trilogy of Himalayan travelogues: Searching for Shangri-la, Conversations with Sacred Mountains, and Shambhala. These were followed by a fourth book (New Age Sutra) and two art heater films (Searching for Shangri-la and Shambhala Sutra). These works expressed Brahm’s multifaceted concerns over environmental protection, ethnic identity, poverty alleviation, income gap redistribution, and promotion of world peace.

From 2006 onward, Brahm embarked on integrating different experiences across the Himalayan range from Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan to Bangladesh and then Sri Lanka, weaving his experiences into a new paradigm that calls for prioritizing environmental protection, ethnic diversity, and cultural sustainability in the context of the Himalayan Consensus. In March 2009, the concepts of the Himalayan Consensus were crystallized in Brahm’s latest book, The Anti-Globalization Breakfast Club: Manifesto for a Peaceful Revolution, published by John Wiley & Sons.

Tags: ,

Newsletter on Political Reform #7 政改通訊第七期

political_logo2

[Please scroll down for the English version]

13.5.2010

第七期通訊

功能組別答客問

18.政府所提出的2012「區議會方案」政改建議: 是否會帶來更多民主成份?!

目前政府的建議,在2012年立法會 選舉400名區議員互選產生所 屬的5個功能組別議席 , 不是政府和其他「建制派」人士所指,是一個“增加民主成份”的方案”。顯然,這不是一個「向前走」的政改方案:通過允許僅400人,選出 六個 席位(原區議會功能界別議席,和從400名當選區議員互選產生的五席), 這造就了這400名區議員成為無論投票權或由被選舉權都比一般選民多的一個一個特權階級,違反了有關國際公約中「普及和平等」原則, 這個方案因而不會如政府所指,會帶來更多「民主成份」。讓全數民選區議員擁有更多功能組別議席和權力,也不符合基本法第97條對「區 域組 織」(即區議會) 屬非政權性組織的定位。

再者,從次一級的議政機構 (區議會) 選出上一 級的議政機構代表 (立法會) 的建議,是倒模自內地人 民代表大會選舉的做法,即是次一級人民代表大會代表選舉高一級的人大代表。這顯然不符合普選「普及而平等」之定義,也可能 反映了本港選舉制度「內地化」的先兆。

總括而言,這個由政府提出的方案,變相增加功能組 別議席,絕不能令政改「向前 走」。 繼續保留功能組別,這顯然不符合基本法在制定過程時,為選舉所定下對「普及和平等」之定義,和達致全面取消功能組別的目的。
19. 取消功能組別,是否會如某些建制派人士所言,導致議會上民粹主義冒起嗎?

取消功能組別,和導致議會上民粹主義,沒有必然關 係。從過往議會投票記錄顯示,功 能界別只是反映了有利於個別工商界利益,專業團體和人士的意見,往往被忽略。而且全球其他地方的議會也實施以地區選舉制度為選舉制 度,而不會實行功能組別形式的選舉制度,也不見得其他地方的議會有民粹主義冒起的出現。
正如前述功能組別議員否決有利民生的議案的例子所 指,不取消功能組別,反而會繼 續功能組別偏重小圈子利益。
(答客問 未完待續)

Newsletter Issue #7

Frequently Asked Questions on Constitutional Reform

18.       The “District Council proposal” proposed by the Government: Does it bring more “Democratic Elements”?

The current proposal by the Government, in which 400 elected District Council members would mutually elect five seats among each other in the newly added functional constituencies, is not what the Government and other “pro-establishment” individuals have stated, namely an attempt to “increase democratic elements”. Clearly, this is not a political reform package which “makes a step forward”. Through the election of six seats in the Legislative Council from merely 400 people (the original seat in the District Council, and through the five seats from the mutual election of 400 elected District Council members), this has effectively created a privileged class in which the 400 elected District Council members would have far more voting rights than the other ordinary voters do. This clearly violates the “universal and fair” principle of elections. The proposal would not bring about more “democratic elements”, as the Government suggests. Allowing all elected members of the District Council to have more seats in the functional constituencies and therefore more “political” power, has clearly violated Article 97 of the Basic Law, which states that the District Councils are not the “organs of power”.

Additionally, the recommendation for the election from a lower level of legislative body (District Councils) in electing the members for a higher level legislative body (the Legislative Council), is modelled from the practice of the election of the National People’s Congress, that is, the election of the lower level of the National People’s Congress to a higher level one. Not only is in violation of the “equal and fair” principle of universal suffrage, but also reflected the situation in which the electoral system in Hong Kong will be more in line with that of the electoral system in the Mainland.

The Government’s proposal, as reflected by its conspicuous intention to increase the seats in the functional constituencies, cannot lead to “paving the way forward” on the issue regarding political reform. Should the functional constituencies continue to exist, it clearly does not abide by the “universal and fair” definitions of the election, as well as fulfil the objective leading to the complete abolition of functional constituencies.

19.       Would the abolition of functional constituencies result in the rise of “populism” in the legislative bodies, as some pro-establishment individuals have suggested?

No direct link exists between functional constituencies, and the emergence of “populism” in the legislature. Previous voting records indicate that the functional constituencies merely reflect the views from the business sectors, while that from professional bodies and individuals within the functional constituencies have often been neglected. Legislative bodies in other parts of the world  also adopt  electoral systems based upon on a geographical constituencies, and they have not implemented the electoral method similar to those of the functional constituencies. We do not see the rise of “populism” in the legislative body in other countries which adopt solely the electoral method based upon geographical constituencies.

(FAQs to be continued)

自製「反對功能組別」海報

請進入以下連結:

http://516.procommons.hk/?id=1

Copyright © 2009 公共專業聯盟 The Professional Commons. All Rights Reserved. Built by Zizsoft Limited