回到「有瓦遮頭」時 ─ 對復建居屋問題的政策建議
ICT Professionals Discussion Forum: Perspectives on Policy Address
公共專業聯盟主辦座談會 : 新民主運動、政改本地立法、通識教育與教育專業的參與
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
Response to 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

Photo Gallery – March for Universal Suffrage on 2 May

Member Activities – Travel Sharing : Journey to Israel – A Modern Odyssey

Member Activities – Travel Sharing

Journey to Israel – A Modern Odyssey

To many people, Israel is a dangerous land of religious fanatics, terrorism and war.  It is often considered a place to be avoided.  Kevin Yam (a member of The Professional Commons) and his wife Lilian challenged this assumption when they made a pilgrimage to Israel by themselves in March 2010.  Far from being a dangerous hotspot, they found a land of diverse landscape and cultures, and warm and devout people.  Kevin and Lilian will share the many happy, touching, sad, tragic and sometimes downright weird stories from their trip with the members of The Professional Commons.

Host: Mr and Mrs Kevin Yam

Time: 14th May 2010, 7:30pm

Venue: Office of The Professional Commons, Room A, 10/F., Times Media Centre, 133 Wanchai Road, Wan Chai

Language: Cantonese

Registration: Online Registration

Tags: , ,

Newsletter on Political Reform #6 政改通訊第六期

political_logo2

[Please scroll down for the English version]

28.4.2010

第六期通訊

14. 什麼才是真正的普選?

真正的普選應該符合普及和平等原則。每個選民都有相同數目的選票,而每一票具有相同的權重。

在行政長官選舉,

1. 不應有任何先決篩選機制。任何取得的最低提名數目的候選人,應可自動成為候選人。
2. 不應該有任何預設篩選機制,例如不應該增加附加條件,要求候選人在提名委員會中 的不同界別,取得一個最低數目的提名。
3. 提名委員會的選舉模式應盡符合民主原則,並確保每個選民擁有同樣的投票權。

立法會功能界別議席,應予取消。在立法會所有的席位,要盡快按照平等的投票權和每票平等比重的原則選出。

15. 功能組別選舉的設計公平嗎?

功能組別的設計並不公平,因為一般市民無法在自己選擇的功能組別成為候選人。因此,雖然有人建議,在立法會選舉,把現時的功能組別開放給每個登記的選民也是普選的一種形式。但因為功能組別的參選權有限制,令市民不能隨意選擇在任何一個功能組別參選,故此仍然違反了普選的定義。

另外,我們不理解的是,既然每個人都可以通過一個簡單的「地方選區」的選舉機制投票,為何仍有人提出設立一個「一席地區直選、加一席由功能組別化妝成「普選」的「假普選」的議席」 的複雜的選舉過程 ?這簡直是在欺騙選民。

16. 基本法初定稿時怎樣界定什麼是「直接選舉」?

而在基本法諮詢委員會政制專責小組1987年年底發表的《直接選舉方法方案歸納報告》亦明確指出,「本文所列舉的直接選舉方法方案,就是以普及和平等的原則,用一人一票方式,由選民直接地選出行政長官以及立法機關議席的方案。」 報告亦列明:

1. 「普及和平等」的定義為: 大致上每位選民有相同的投票權利,而每張選票的價值亦平等,
2. 「直選」的定義為:選民直接地決定誰入當選行政長官以及立法機關成員,
3. 「開放性」的定義為: 選民的資格無特別限制,投票過程公開。1

功能組別選舉,違反基本法諮委會政制專責小組在報告所訂下之「大致上每位選民有相同的投票權利,而每張選票的價值亦平等」的原則:成為功能組別的選民和參選的資格亦有許多特別限制。讓功能組別繼續存在,顯然不符合《直接選舉方法方案歸納報告》中指出「以普及和平等的原則,用一人一票方式,由選民直接地選出行政長官以及立法機關議席的方案」。

在後來的基本法草擬委員會上,原草擬的條文是 “ 立法機關全部議員最終要由普選產生 ” ,雖然有委員提出要刪除 “ 立法機關全部議員最終要由普選產生 ” 這個目標,但最終這項條文最終獲保留,並反映在現時基本法第68條內,即是「立法會的產生辦法根據香港特別行政區的實際情況和循序漸進的原則而規定,最終達至全部議員由普選產生的目標」。因此,功能組別繼續存在的則違背了中英聯合聲明所定下的對 “ 選舉 ” 或 “普選產生”的定義。

(未完待續)

____________________________________________________________

Newsletter #6

(FAQ on Functional Constituencies)

13. What factors constitute “genuine universal suffrage”?

Genuine universal suffrage should be universal and equal. Every voter should have the same number of votes, and each vote the same weight.

In the Chief Executive election:

1. There should not be any pre-screening mechanism in the selection of the Chief Executive. Any candidate who has obtained the minimum number of nominations should be automatically nominated as the candidate in the Chief Executive election.
2. There should not be any pre-set screening mechanism for standing as a candidate in the Chief Executive election. For example, there should not be an additional condition for standing through the setting of proportion on the nominations from the Nomination Committee members for different sectors.
3. The selection process of the members of the Nomination Committee for the election of the Chief Executive should adhere to democratic principle as possible, and ensure that every voter has the same voting rights.

Functional constituency seats should be abolished. All seats in the Legislative Council should be voted in accordance with the equal vote and equal weighting principle as soon as possible.

14. Is the design of the functional constituencies fair?

The design of the functional constituencies is not fair, as the general public cannot choose which functional constituency they could be contested as a candidate. Hence, although some have suggested that the existing form of functional constituencies could be opened to every registered voter in the Legislative Council, it should not be considered as a form of universal suffrage. It also violates the definition of universal suffrage in international conventions and treaties, as there are still certain levels of limitations for an individual to be nominated in the functional constituencies. They cannot choose freely which functional constituencies they are able to run.

Also, we cannot understand why every voter can vote under a simple voting mechanism through casting a single vote in one “geographical constituency”, and why some individuals and organizations are still proposing a complicated electoral process of “one vote in geographical constituency, and one “pseudo” vote in a functional constituency. They disguise this as universal suffrage, when it is basically a remodelling of the functional constituency system” This is clearly deceiving the voters.

15. When the Basic Law was first drafted, how was “direct election” defined?

In the “Consolidated Report of the Methods of the Direct Election Proposal” by the Political System Sub-committee of the Basic Law Drafting Committee published in 1987, it states that “the direct election method proposal listed under this document shall become the proposals of the voting of the Chief Executive and the legislature.” The Report also specified:

1. The definition of “universal and fair”: Every single voter should essentially have the same voting rights, and the value of each of the votes is essentially the same;
2. The definition of “direct election”: There is no specific limitation regarding the qualifications of the voters, the voting process is open;
3. The definition of “openness”: There is no specific limitation on the qualifications of the voters, the electoral process should be fair.2

Functional constituency elections violate the principle of “equal voting rights for each voters in essence, and the value of each vote should also be the same”. This was proposed by the political system sub-committee of the Basic Law Drafting Committee. As far as the election is concerned, there are still many special limitations regarding the qualification to be a voter and that to run in those elections. Allowing the functional constituencies to continue would clearly violate the principle of “using one man one vote system for the direct election of the Chief Executive and members of the legislative chamber, under the equal and universal principles.”

During the subsequent Basic Law drafting committee meetings, the clause for the method of selection of the legislature stated that “the legislature should be eventually running under direct election”. Although some committee members proposed to delete such an objective, it still remains as an official clause in the Basic Law. Hence, the continued existence of functional constituencies violates the definitions of “election” and “election through universal suffrage,” as stipulated under the Sino-British Joint Declaration.


[1] 《中華人民共和國香港特別行政區基本法諮詢委員會 政制專責小組 直接選舉方法方案歸納報告》(19871123日經執行委員會通過)

[2] 《中華人民共和國香港特別行政區基本法諮詢委員會 政制專責小組 直接選舉方法方案歸納報告》(19871123日經執行委員會通過) “Consolidated Report of the Methods of the Direct Election Proposal” by the Political System Sub-committee of the Basic Law Drafting Committee (passed by the Execution Committee on 23 November 1987).

Newsletter on Political Reform #5 政改通訊第五期

political_logo2

[Please scroll down for the English version]

21.4.2010

第五期通訊

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

(只有中文)

對於政府所發表的《二零一二年行政長官及立法會產生辦法建議方案》

(以下簡稱 「建議方案」),公共專業聯盟表示深切遺憾。

較早前,泛民主派和「終極普選大聯盟」協調產生一個循序漸進的方案,從 2012至2020年逐步落實雙普選。但政府今天提出的建議方案只屬對原方案  的小修補,未有為2017年及2020年逐步落實普選提供路線圖,也拒絕承諾在2020年全面廢除功能組別。政府完全不理 會泛民主派的協調方案,對此我們 感到十分失望。

我們呼籲選民在5月16日踴躍投票,以選票表達對全面普選的訴求。

(功能組別答客問)

12. 功 能組別是否達到向政府提供「專業」的意見的功能?

如果設立功能組別的意圖是吸納專業人士和商界的意見,並 向政府提供「專業」的意見,以便順利實施政府的政策,這顯然這並不符合現實,因為功能組別議席已變質,成為一個為保護既得利益的制 度。我們從功能組別選舉見到,候選人為要討好選民,無可避免要把業界的利益作為政綱,而選民亦愈來愈自覺要透過界別的議員爭取利益,例 如爭取政府在預算案中為界別開設更多職位。殊不知這樣強化個別界別的狹隘利益,污染了專業以社會利益為先的道德操守。政治的過程, 透過整合廣泛的、不同的利益以協調資源分配,達致社會和諧,功能組別選舉,和政治整合精神背道而馳

13. 有些專業界別人士以為,專業界別受惠在功能組別代表。事實又是否如 此?

我們認為,與其說是功能組別是為專業發聲,倒不如說是商業利益凌駕香港市民大眾 的利益。

現時,立法會的一般(政府提出的)議案是由議員簡單多數表決通過,但是,由 立法會議員所提出的議案及動議,卻必須得到分別來自功能組別和地區選區的議員過半數通過,即所謂「分組點票」的機制。換言之,祇 要有其中一個組別的一半議員(即立法會整體的四分之一的議員)反對,議員所提出的議案及動議就無法通過。在立法會2004年至2009年度,來 自商界的功能組別議員,集體向23項由立法會議員提出有利社會民生、而不利於工商界利益的議案予以否決。其中包括以下例 子:

  • 最低工資、最高工時,動議日期:
    • 日期:13/10/2004
    • 動議人: 陳婉嫻;
    • 14名商界的功能組別議員投反對或棄權票;
    • 同一議題的動議,在2006111日再度遭13名商界的功能組 別議員投反對或棄權票。
  • 全民退休保障:
    • 日期:26/4/2006
    • 動議人:李卓人;
    • 10名商界的功能組別議員投反對或棄權票。
  • 制訂公平競爭法例:
    • 日期:20/10/2004
    • 動議人:李華明;
    • 11名商界的功能組別議員投反對或棄權票)
  • 成立基金應付人口老化及扶貧需要:
    • 日期:9/1/2008
    • 動議人:譚香文;
    • 12名商界的功能組別議員投反對或棄權票。

因工商界功能組別議員集體否決該等議案,縱使 在地區選區的議員大多贊成下,那些議案在「分組點票」機制下,仍遭否決。不幸地,作為功能組別一部分的專業界,都因此要承受背負出賣 香港市民利益的污名。


_________________________________________________________________________

Newsletter #5

(FAQ on Functional Constituencies)

12. Could legislators in the functional constituencies serve the functions to provide “professional” advice to the Government?

If the intention of the establishment of functional constituencies is to grasp the opinion from the professionals, as well as from businessmen, and to provide “professional” advice to the Government for a smooth implementation of Government’s policies, this clearly does not reflect the reality, as the functional constituencies seats have been degraded into a system merely serve to protect the interests of the sectoral interests, for example, pressing the Government to open more job positions for their respective sectors in the Budget address. Hence, functional constituencies merely serve the role of strengthen the narrow interests of individual sectors, and failed to prioritize their concerns on common public interests. Through the integration of different and wide level of interests, social harmony could be realized under the political process. The functional constituencies have failed to realize the predetermined goal of political alignments of different interests.

13. Some professional thought that the functional constituencies have been influencing policy outputs through professional inputs, does it reflects the reality?

Some professional sectors thought that, their voices would be better heard through the representation in the functional constituencies. But it is not the case, as the business interests override the interests of the general public through the decisions of the legislators from the functional constituencies.

Currently, the bills (proposed by the Government) would be considered as passed through a simple majority in the LegCo. But, for the bills and motions proposed by the legislators, they have to be passed by more than half of the legislators from the legislators from the functional constituencies and the geographical constituencies respectively, that is the so called “split voting system”. Hence, the motions and debates would not be able to pass, should an objection have been received from merely half of the legislator from either one of the two groups (that means a quarter of the overall number of legislators).

During the LegCo year between 2004 and 2009, the legislators from the business interests in the functional constituencies have objected 23 motions which are not beneficiary towards the businesses, but are of vital importance and bring about significant improvement to the society as a whole. The examples include:

  • Minimum Wage, Maximum Working Hours:
    • Date of motion: 13/10/2004,
    • Legislator who tabled the motion: Chan Yuen-han
    • 14 business-based FC legislators has voted against or abstained.
    • A motion of similar wordings has been defeated through a block vote of 13 business based FC legislators who voted against or abstained on 1 November 2006.
  • Universal Retirement Protection Scheme:
    • Date of motion: 26/4/2006,
    • Legislator who tabled the motion: Lee Cheuk Yan
    • 10 business based FC legislators voted against or abstained.
  • Legislation of a Fair Competition Law:
    • Date of motion: 20/10/2004,
    • Legislator who tabled the motion: Lee Wah Ming
    • 11 business based FC legislators voted against or abstained.
  • Establishment of a fund to fulfill the needs of the ageing of the population and alleviation of poverty:
    • Date of motion: 9/1/2008,
    • Legislator who tabled the motion: Mandy Tam
    • 12 business based FC legislators voted against or abstained.

As a result of the collective objection of the legislative proposals from the business based functional constituencies, even though the motions were supported by the majority of the geographical constituencies, they are still being defeated. As the professional sector constitutes part of the functional constituencies, and their opinions are not being reflected in the legislature due to the dominance of the business sector, the professional sectors have been reluctantly bearing the bad name as part of the system that are betraying the interest of Hong Kong’s citizenry.

(FAQ to be continued)

終極普選團結大會 – 4 月 25 日(星期日)

*終極普選團結大會*

日期:2010 年 4 月 25 日(星期日)
時間:3:00pm – 5:00pm
地點:明愛九龍社區中心 3 樓禮堂(九龍太子道西 256A 號)
目的:凝聚力量爭取終極普選、推動普選聯策略及政改方案、反對政府爛方案
大會負責人:李健勤、陳樹英
地圖: http://klncc.caritas.org.hk/center.asp

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