保育?

Below are my personal opinions on the recent conservation squabbles.

保育?不知道全名是什麼。我們同意保留對香港有歷史意義的東西,但不同意用非理性的態度非理性的成本去處理文物的保護,斷不能只為保育而破壞我們賴以成功的基本:對私有產權的尊重,對巿埸運作的信任,對整體社會經濟效率的追求。

皇后碼頭:如拆卸皇后碼頭是舒緩中區交通的其一方案,那麼巿民及政府應進行小學生決定是否換壁佈板一樣的討論:是否一定要換?換了有什麼好處?班會有沒有錢?要鋼版還是松本?有沒有人不捨得舊版?環保嗎?將舊版移到操埸邊可以嗎?新版裝在班房裡面還是外面?但偏偏各政黨各環保保育大學等等等團體和我們供養的政府局長們就沒有一個大聲告訴我們這些不同的方案去讓市民定奪,而是我猜你想拆掉植民地歷史你猜我想撈政治本錢。我們認為所謂背後動機不重要,拆不拆也不重要,重要的是解決問題的理性討論。到底有多少人塞車?塞多久?有否市埸機制去解決?到底市民怎看?怎樣問市民?有多少個方案可選?各方案有何利弊 … 噢,多懷念小學的日子 。

景賢里:如要政府代表市民出手去標籤景賢里為法定古蹟,那麼即是說景賢里有很多市民想閒時去逛逛、很多遊客以此為景點、它的存在帶給我們無限滿足回憶等等,但業主太笨未能將這些巨大需求轉化為經濟收益。這些是事實嗎?試訪問街上的市民有多少個想去景賢里看看,訪問旅行社沒有了景賢里會不會少了生意。標籤景賢里為古蹟只不過是說業主太笨,只不過是粗暴地干預業主之私產權。業主笨自有市埸懲罰,但業主對景賢里拆卸有權,所謂偷偷拆卸應說是對私產受侵的抗議而絕不應被看成狗偷行為。如說景賢里有巨大的歷史意義,是否應討論到底何謂歷史意義,如何量度?如不能量度又有甚麼方法?如果你仍要告訴我們原業主是誰、現業主怎樣買回來、拍過什麼電影、政府反應太慢等等,對不起,我們和你思想方法不同,可免。

 

Only a person who truly loves his “country” could have written this

WSJ – China’s Olympic Opportunity

By MARTIN LEE
October 17, 2007; Page A18

WSJ – Hong Kong: When President George W. Bush accepted President Hu Jintao’s invitation to attend the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, Mr. Bush’s press secretary said that he was going to the Games as “a sports fan, not to make any political statement.” I too am a great sports fan — especially of the Soccer World Cup — but I would encourage President Bush to take a broader vision of the possibilities for the Beijing Games. He should use the next 10 months to press for a significant improvement of basic human rights in my country, including press, assembly and religious freedoms.

This should be possible, since Chinese leaders have promised to make these improvements anyway. In their pledges to the International Olympic Committee while bidding for the Games and since, China’s leaders at all levels repeatedly assured the world that they would use the Games to go beyond improving the country’s physical infrastructure.

“By applying for the Olympics, we want to promote not just the city’s development, but the development of society, including democracy and human rights,” one of China’s key Olympic figures, Deputy Mayor Liu Jingmin, told the Washington Post in 2001. Then, Mr. Liu said, “If people have a target like the Olympics to strive for, it will help us establish a more just and harmonious society, a more democratic society, and help integrate China into the world.”

I couldn’t agree more. But instead of the hoped-for reforms, the Chinese government appears to be backsliding on its promises, including in Hong Kong where we have near total political paralysis, not the promised road to full
democracy. That is no reason to give up on the prospects for reform in China. But it is reason to step up the direct engagement on these pressing issues.

In accepting the invitation to attend China’s Games, President Bush said this would be “a moment where China’s leaders can use the opportunity to show confidence by demonstrating a commitment to greater openness and tolerance.” [blue]Instead of a “moment” of change, China needs structural and long-term reforms: placing the Communist Party under the rule of law, unshackling the media and Internet, allowing religious adherents to freely practice their faiths, ceasing harassment of civil-society groups that work on AIDS and the environment, and addressing modest calls for accountability in the political system. Mr. Bush and other world leaders planning to attend the Olympics should not wait for the opening ceremony, but must start now with sustained efforts to achieve this agenda.

One reason for optimism about the possibilities for progress in China is recent Olympic history. When South Korea bid for the 1988 Games, the country was a military dictatorship. Due in good part to the prospects for embarrassment and international engagement, the Olympics helped kick off an overdue peaceful political transformation in South Korea just six months before the launch of the Seoul Games. Since then, South Korea has endured as one of Asia’s most stable and vital democracies. The parallels between South Korea and China are not exact, but the lesson is that the Olympics certainly present an opening to raise these issues in the context of the Chinese government’s own promises.

In the U.S. and elsewhere, there are campaigns to boycott the Beijing Games over the Chinese government’s trade with and support for regimes in Sudan and Burma. As a Chinese person, I would encourage backers of these efforts to consider the positive effects Olympic exposure could still have in China, including scrutiny by the world’s journalists. This is certainly the time for Chinese leaders to step up and constructively use their clout in Asia and Africa. In so doing, Beijing should open a new chapter of responsible foreign policy and convince the world it is not oblivious to these issues.

Chinese people around the world are proud that China will host the Games. China has the world’s fastest growing economy, and may indeed put on history’s most impressive Olympic Games next August. But how does it profit our nation if it wins gold medals but suffers from the continued absence of democracy, human rights and the rule of law?

It is my hope that the Games could have a catalytic effect on the domestic and foreign policies of the Chinese government, and that the Chinese people will remember the Games long after they are held — not merely for medals won, but also because they were a turning point for human rights and the rule of law in China. That would be something worth cheering.

Mr. Lee is a democratically elected legislator and the founding chairman of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party.

色戒

好的電影令人看後低迴。我不知道誰是汪精衞,但也曾看過幾本歷史書。人性,好像是我們中華民族一個比較大的問題。黨性泯滅人性,姓吳的特工頭目以 “他殺了我老婆我還可以跟他吃飯”為傲然後 “行刺失風後混過了關” ,賴秀金的一閃嫉妒和及後提高聲調的一句 “王佳芝你過來” ,鄺裕民迷糊地推了王佳芝入火坑,都只不過是用愛國的幌子包裝起來的自私與無知。他們都不及易先生看的透徹直接: 只有自私恐懼。愛國青年們不也只有自私恐懼?他們可有真勇敢真愛國? “那些渾小子經不起訊問,吃了點苦頭全都說了。” 可恨他們愛的 “國” 沒對他們有絲點愛護憐憫。

鄺裕民也許有一點良心掙扎,但他在石礦埸赴死前一刻望向王佳芝的怨恨眼神說明了他到死還不明白。而她,雖然胡里胡塗地上了這一班愛國迷幻列車,但她最後還勇敢選擇。她最後的眼神沒有怨恨,更不需要歉疚。她追尋的只是簡單的 “拴著一隻紙扎紅綠白三色小風車的白馬騎士”,奈何她生於一個錯誤的時空,生於一個沒有愛的羣族中。

看電影後,找來原著看了一遍。導演的確鬼斧神功,幫了我們這羣不善於想像的電視世代一把。色戒的確是一套層次豐富的好電影,每個眼神,每句對白,每一細節都彷彿懂得訴說自己的故事。不妨再看。

老港正傳

 

老港正傳: 令人驚喜感動的電影。或許香港人普遍不對左派有好感,但此片真實地描繪了傳統左派 (左派此名也不甚正確,應稱為傳統愛國派) 於香港早期生存於英治及中共影響的夾縫中所受的苦難。左向港的無私愛國情操實令人感動,但這種情操肯定不存在於我們現在所認識的左派中。若左向港真有其人,未知現在有何感受? 作為回歸十年記念,此片沒敢觸碰中共的釘子,但也絕不媚共。應向銀都機構及趙良駿致敬。

左忠(鄭中基)及陸思敏(莫文蔚)的一段情也實在拍得窩心。我可以說陸思敏是所有男人夢寐以求的青梅竹馬小戀人,也可以說左忠肯定得不到正常香港女性的歡心。如果你和女伴一起看此電影,她可以看畢全程,沒有發出任何不屑的聲音,對左向港有一點點同情兼受左忠和思敏的關係感動,那麼她肯定是一個難得的好女人。

美中不足之處是鏡頭的處理及鄭中基的笑片式演技不太適合此片。

 

小明小強學論語

老師要小明小強解釋“士不可以不弘毅,任重而道遠。仁以為己任,不亦重乎?死而后已,不亦遠乎?”

小強:“有志者不可以不培養堅強的意志,因為責任重大而且道路遙遠。以實現仁德為自己的責任,這樣的責任不是很重大嗎?為此理想奮斗終身,這樣的道路不是很遙遠嗎?”

小明:“當權者不可輕說弘毅。”

老師:“為甚麼?”

小明:“我任重而道遠,我權大兼有排玩。仁以為已任,我任不是你任,不亦過癮乎?死而後已,不亦太虛假浮誇乎?”

小強一百分,小明慘被罰留堂。

牛肉佬給街坊的信

明師奶於茶樓發表辛酸史,熱爆街坊,感人肺腑,一時洛陽紙貴。唯獨牛肉佬心有不忿,感覺比人借黎過橋。

“我四十年前入行,後來轉做牛肉,由於當時少人做牛肉,又冇競爭,覺得自已係街巿精英,不自覺就開始自已幫客人決定牛展定牛腩,開始鬧啲客,亦開始呃稱。呃稱呃佐四十年,呢啲係環境造就,社會嘅錯! 但今日我好唔開心,好唔明白,點解新黎牛肉仔開檔之後,個個為佢打氣,踩我台?? 我知佢讀番書,唔呃稱,但係大家諗諗,我呃稱呃佐幾十年,慣佐,要改,要好大勇氣放下身段,係好艱難、好艱難、好艱難 … 但牛肉仔未呃過稱,佢根本唔使改!! 咁你地話啦,係咪應該支持我多啲呀??”

“仲有,牛肉仔黎佐之後,我生平第一次,第一次學習到原來啲客可以選擇拒絕我 … 上次強師奶膽敢唔要我切佐嗰件牛膀,我都冇鬧佢,仲笑笑口添!! 你地咁都感覺唔到我嘅誠意??”

小朋的零用錢與明師奶的辛酸史

今天星期天, 爺爺嫲嫲公公婆婆爸爸媽媽大明小明一起飲茶。小明又提起和諧家庭公平問題: 一人一票決定零用錢。

就此各有各說。到明師奶發言。

“各位, 我六十二歲啦。想當年, 我同你地老豆做佐好多重大決定, 例如我地決定係祖先個神位用電蠟燭唔用真火嘅蠟燭 … 呢個決定實在係好大, 搞得唔好可能仲容易火燭!! 當時我其實已經同你地老豆有默契, 如果搞得唔好燒佐間屋, 我地就一齊永遠放棄打麻雀!!”

“麻雀我打佐四十年啦。自二十年前開始贏多輸少, 希望你明白同容忍我有啲傲慢 … 正如街市牛肉佬呃稱呃佐咁多年, 呃你係正常嘅 … 如果佢唔呃, 一定居心叵測!! 小明你記住啦, 呢啲智慧你老師唔識教你架!!”

“我呢世人好少送禮 … 放下身段唔係話咁易。好似上次拜山用剩啲菊花, 我一番好意送比強師奶, 吖, 佢竟然唔領情!! 我第一次送禮比佢佢就唔領情!! 我心裏多難過 … 我都有人性一面架 …”

“係, 我知我幾十年都關門做決定 … 但你不要忘記街市牛肉佬。我其實做人好真。你信我啦!! 我一定做好你阿媽!!”

Congratulations

Congratulations to Mr. Donald Tsang for winning the election. However our discontent with the current system, at least Donald came out a winner by getting support of 649 EC members, and also won significant support of the public through his campaign. And I am very glad to hear Donald restating again and again of finding an ‘ultimate solution’ for direct elections within the next five years. I hope he could stick with his promises.

And, sincere thanks to voters, EC members and Mr. Alan Leong who made this contested election possible. This poll outcome today was anticipated at the beginning, but HK people had the process, the debates, and a chance to build their individual ideas about politics, about their own rights, and about direct elections.

Today, I cast my vote at about 9:20AM. There was a waiting area for EC members to have some snacks, do some socializing, and wait for next round of voting if needed. Thoughts flashed through my mind when I was there … I saw a significant portion of the 800 EC members there, some big shots, some celebrities, and some EC members wearing old style suit and shoes … I did not discriminate for or against any of them at all … I am equally weird too afterall, but only that this group of people certainly did not look similar to ordinary HK people that we meet in the streets, and this is the circle of people who pick the next CE for the 7 million people of HK, and these people could fit in nicely-in a 6000 square-feet area. Now at the finale I became one of them … should I feel glad ? Or otherwise ?

I am not going to do a morality preach here, I am not qualified to do so either. I respect that many of the EC members do not agree with our quest for 2012 direct elections, just like I do not agree with the approach that Long Hair takes … but I respect his choice and persistence. Direct elections are built on the foundation of respect to individual choices, and the quest for direct elections is indeed a quest for harmony. I hope and I trust Mr. Donald Tsang would not read the quest for democracy as conflicts between ranks again. Lets look forward to Mr. Tsang’s “big show” to a more harmonious and democratic society in the next 5 years.


Long Hair in costume …

明師奶打牌

英姑姐:“強師奶你唔啱啦,你搵個新手嚟鄧腳都唔事先通知聲我吔明師奶? ”

明師奶:“係啦,我話晒打牌四十年,唔係人人都有資格同我打嘅。如果為佐鄧夠腳乜人都搵,咁下次你咪揾個廢柴嚟同我打都得? 拿,我唔係話你今次個朋友呀。”

明師奶:“仲有,我知佢牌章唔夠我熟,但我都尊重佢,放下身段同佢打!! 但佢全不知機,我讓佐佢領放八圈佢仲笑笑口!! 好在我連入好章最後反勝。 呀,佢最後輸錢都仲笑笑口喎! 抵得佢吖 …”

英姑姐:“係啦,好彩我地明師奶牌品好咋,唔係點會同佢打夠十六圈!! ”

The Pamphlet …

You could judge who is your favourite …

Although only 800 have votes in 2007, lets hope there needs 7-million copies of this thing in 2012. :)

Click to enlarge.

I can’t help to make a small note: Donald was practical and Alan was visionary. But note that Donald ranked direct elections and democracy at the last of items ….

“廢柴”都可以參選

http://news.bbc.co.uk/chinese/trad/hi/newsid_6470000/newsid_6478400/6478461.stm

香港特首選情:體會朱總的曾蔭權?
 
“不管前面是地雷陣還是萬丈深淵,我都將勇往直前,義無反顧,鞠躬盡瘁,死而後已。”

如果有印象,當會記得這話是前國務院總理朱鎔基在1998年出任總理後的首個記者招待會上,說了這句話來形容他當總理治國的心情。

到了2007年,快要當選第三屆香港行政長官的曾蔭權在自己的選舉網志中,說自己體會朱總的心情。

現任國務院總理溫家寶在每年的總理中外記者會上,開場白中都會提到市民在網站所提出關注,讓他感動和憂心。

已經當了兩年行政長官的曾蔭權說,看了市民在網頁的留言,有些讓他讀後幾乎流眼淚,有些則令他慚愧。

溫家寶在今年記者會上,提到自己親自用毛筆回信為小學生打氣,曾蔭權就說自己親自寫信給一位母親,祝她得償所願。這位母親對孩子的期望是 “做甚麼都可以,就是不要做特首。”

總理溫家寶和前總理朱鎔基在港人眼中,都是謙虛的人。港人愛稱溫家寶是 “平民總理”,而朱鎔基是 “鐵臉總理”。

曾蔭權呢?有人形容他是 “黑臉特首”。

“廢柴”都可以參選

曾蔭權周三(3月21日)會見香港傳媒高層,大談對香港政制和競選對手梁家傑的看法。

由於取得近8成選委支持,預料會高票連任的曾蔭權說 “有401票已經足夠”。他又說經過這次有競爭的選舉,他相信將來每一次特首選舉都會有競爭。

曾蔭權說, “香港人到時出了個 “廢柴(香港俚語, 指沒有用的人)”,都會比夠票,一定讓他出來選。”

為了讓人不要認為他說梁家傑是 “廢柴”,曾蔭權補充 “我不是說這次選舉。”

對於對手梁家傑的表現,香港報章《明報》引述了他的說法, “我都知道他 “不熟書”,但我都尊重他出來一起辯論。”曾蔭權想指出由於他是特首,所以會更掌握有關政府的數據。

“天堂才有”

對於民主派的評語,曾蔭權來得毫不客氣,他指出普選並非只有一個模式,也不一定是 “一人一票單議會”。

他說, “我希望告訴劉慧卿(民主派立法會議員)之流,他們所要求的(普選模式),真是天堂才有。”

目前曾蔭權就香港政制的構思,是希望用綠皮書的形式提出三個符合普選定義的方案,待諮詢期後,再綜合為一個終極方案。

如果終極方案得到6成市民支持,便會上報中央政府。民主派議員湯家驊便批評,這種模式令市民無法選擇其他方案,只能選擇政府的混合方案,如果不接受,又會比認為沒有共識,最後原地踏步。

曾蔭權矢言這次政制改革是 “大家香港一齊都要玩一鋪勁的(大動作)。”

震英姑姐教導小明

“小明,我聽你媽講你要一人一票評評你的零用錢。拿,你聽我講。我知你同學仔小強屋企好民主,一人一票決定佢嘅零用。拿,民主係好嘅,但我哋家情同佢地有啲唔同。我哋屋企有爺爺嫲嫲公公婆婆爸爸媽媽哥哥,小強屋企只有爺爺嫲嫲公公婆婆爸爸媽媽。小強冇哥哥!! 仲有,小強屋企向東,我哋屋企向西!! 你話我哋屋企係咪同小強屋企好大分別呢? 所以呢,我哋唔可以照抄小強的一人一票。你明白冇?”

小明攪階級鬥爭

小明不滿零用錢只及哥哥大明的一半,和一言堂母親談判。小明要求爺爺嫲嫲公公婆婆爸爸媽媽哥哥一人一票評評理。

媽媽怒吼: “你和哥哥都是我生的,今天你是弟弟明天你可能變哥哥。你要一人一票,係唔係想攪階級鬥爭? 係唔係想攪家庭分化?”

什麼可以做,什麼不可以做

曾先生於三月十五日答問大會的結語中說:“特區行政長官要知道什麼可以做,什麼不可以做。”

知其不可為而為之,是每一位政治家應有的素質。史上的政治家如甘地、曼特拉、毛澤東、鄧小平、昂山素姬等等,皆曾為不可為的目標奮鬥過。當然,曾先生也只是常人,我們不能對他有過份要求,但請他不要再喚自已作政治家或 Politician 了。做好這份工可以了。

曾先生的結語也令我更明白一件事。在此我要向一衆共同努力促成這次競爭的選民、選委會成員及梁家傑先生致敬。他們不是偉人,只是普通人,可能更是得不到你認同的普通人。但他們有明知不可為而為之的勇氣。

No Such Pressure, continued

ebin Says:
March 2nd, 2007 at 6:23 pm

What about the theory that the Communist Party is afraid that free election in HK will lead to similar demand in the Mainland, which could put the Communist Party’s rule at risk?

lento Says:
March 6th, 2007 at 1:30 am

The economic system of China is proven so far. But the political system is becoming more and more of a hurdle to growth of China. Some might say the power of the party is primal that anything putting that to risk shall be suppressed. But time rolls forward. The world economy is becoming more and more interwoven. Communications technology tears down all borders. Suppression would just starken and defer that conflict.

Yes I know. The key is power. The key is money. The status quo of high economic growth and tight political control might be optimal for those terms – at the moment. But building and defering conflicts within billion people is not for the long term I believe. For true longetivity of that power, the ruling party needs to win the love of people.

Political reform would be the key, but it could equally be risky. However, we have a very suitable test ground to start – HK.

I am in no way against the ruling Communist party. I was born in China, spent my memorable childhood there and all I could remember about the Party were positive. I am also very amazed by its achievement for the billion people, and I truly understand that the current situation – suppression of speech, suppression of religion, etc. are the result of all the constraints around. This is natural. Game theory. What I heartfully hope is that the Communist Party could transform itself to a party that we all love, a Party that most people would love to engage, a Party that emboses a great name in history of our great motherland.

IT People meeting Alan Leong

9 of the IT sector election committee members, including the 6 members of IT Voice, organised an event and invited IT practitioners to meet with our CE candidates. Unfortunately, Donald Tsang refused to turn up. Alan Leong was there, and we had a good time for IT people to exchange views with Alan. The event was held on 2nd March 2007 at Quarry Bay.

The concluding remark of Alan was, “Well, winning or losing does not matter. We have honoured our believe and done our part, and will continue our work after the election.”

The Wanna-Be Agents

Late night, watching news. Some HKSAR representive of the National People’s Congress spoke on the screen, “Direct elections are not suitable for HK”.

This was straight forward and lovely. It only reaffirmed my believe that there are such people who do not want direct elections, because with direct elections, they will lose their value of existence.

Unless our Chairman Mr. Wu, or our Premier Mr. Wen, came to the screen and say so, I don’t believe that our motherland objects to direct elections in HK. Our “Power Speculators”, if you don’t mind, speak less, cos you are doing yourself dis-service.

The Rule Of Law

Donald blasted Alan, “I read that Alan is suggesting all problems could be solved by Law, seemed like suggesting that Lawyers should rule HK”.

This is outright lack of the quality for CE of HK, in my humble opinion.

I parked my car not right, I shall be punished HK$320. Thats law. I paid tax late and I am fined 10% penalty, thats Law. I cannot smoke in the bowling alley giving me a drop of 20 pins average. That was also Law. All and every matters about HK is written in the Law. What exactly was Donald trying to say ? Right now in HK, do we actually solve problems in accordance to the law ? Can you give me an example of one single problem not solved by the law in HK, Mr. Tsang ?

Be it Rule Of Law or the evil Rule By Law, there still is the “Law”. I am expecting better quality on you, my next CE.

Corollaries for brain storming.

To Sin Chung Kai: “You are saying that wireless network gives more convenience. Seems like you want IT people to rule HK’s communications”

To Choi So Yuk: “You advocate minimum wage. Seemed like you want to be Queen of Labours.”

To Francis Yam: “You said the US-Peg is the foundation. Seems like bankers rule HK’s finances.”

To Cheung Man Kwong: “You said small-class education is good. Seems like teachers should rule education.”

To Ho Hau Wah: “You said gambling helps Macau’s economy. Seems like casino runners should rule Macau.”

No Such Pressure

We do not particularly favour Alan Leong or Donald Tsang. We are asking why the people of HK, the 7 million, be striped of their right to collectively choose an Chief Executive for HK. On this solitary point Alan Leong gets my favour.

It is widely believed that our motherland does not want to grant this right to people of HK. Well, I don’t think so. Or at the minimum, our motherland is more opened minded than we think – as Alan said, look how Donald became “blessed” though he was labelled the “British Camp”. Our motherland and the Chinese government is not the force that keeps us from direct elections. Use your common sense – our national army is stationed in HK, and people of HK do not have a history of rebelliance at all. So why is there the theory going all around ?

The answer, I believe, is that there are a group of people wanting to keep this state – The state of illusion that HK people asking for universal suffrage is against the interest of China, the state of this small circle election, the state of HK people being robbed of their voting right. Only at such state could they continue to be important, and continue to keep their influence to the administration for their own interest – political interest, business interest.

Come on HK people, don’t be fooled. Come on our motherland, don’t be fooled. I understand human beings are born to be selfish. But, life has a limited span. How come some people could exhibit selfishness so sheer ?

Our motherland is indeed more opened minded than we think, kids. :)

Read more at http://www.itvoice.hk/

謊言背後的事實

選委會800成員當中有部份於ニ月一日收到曾先生掛號郵件邀請出席ニ月ニ日早上九時舉行的會面。本人作為選委的一員有以下之強烈不滿。 

一日通知是否太短? 到底曾先生對選委成員有多尊重? 況且掛號郵件未必能即時有人接收, 這點相信做了四十年公務員的曾先生應該知道。到底曾先生是否真心希望會見所有選委成員? 還是有選擇性地方便一部份成員? 

觀乎今天曾先生的表現, 什麼沒有時間答問等等, 根本曾先生骨子裏只當這是他的一埸個人秀, 骨子裏沒有把這班選委放在眼內, 沒有把市民放在眼內。此小圈子選舉已把市民的權利剝奪, 為何曾先生竟然連最表面的戲也欠奉? 

什麼做好這份工? 什麼市民是老闆? 八百人也不懂尊重, 我信你會尊重沒有票的八百萬人嗎? 

我是資訊科技界別選委葉旭暉。我希望傳媒能全面報導選委的所知所見, 讓公衆知多一點謊言背後的事實。