Ming Pao: Wearing Two Hats, Feathering Their Own Nests - Kwai Tsing Councillors

Wearing Two Hats, Feathering Their Own Nests - Kwai Tsing Councillors

Translated by Samuel L, edited by Karen L., written by Chow Chin-hung and Cheng Pui-shan @ Ming Pao, original graphics by Ming Pao, translated graphics by Hong Kong Columns (Translated)
Original: http://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E8%91%B5%E9%9D%92%E5%8D%80%E6%9C%83%E6%92%A5%E6%AC%BE%E8%87%AA%E5%B7%B1%E6%89%B9%E8%87%AA%E5%B7%B1-%E5%85%AD%E6%88%90%E6%B4%BB%E5%8B%95%E6%89%BE%E3%80%8C%E9%97%9C%E9%80%A3%E5%9C%98%E9%AB%94%E3%80%8D%E5%90%88%E8%BE%A6%20%E8%AD%B0%E5%93%A1%EF%B9%95%E9%9B%A3%E6%89%BE%E5%85%B6%E4%BB%96%E5%9C%98%E9%AB%94/web_tc/article/20150607/s00001/1433612964188 

Election of the District Council will be held at the near end of the year. As the District Council will come to a halt by September, grants for various district activities are urgently put forth in July and August.

It is found that 60% of all 343 activities granted by Kwai Tsing District Council were co-organised with "associated societies" in which the district councillors who acted as the working group chairpersons took up important positions. Over $10 million was involved in the course without any open tendering procedures. Activities that were successfully held through such "granting-to-themselves”"practice include whole-district activities namely Art Festival and Dancing Festival.

Stephen Char, the former Chief Investigator of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), remarked that such system is giving an impression of "feathering one's own nest". A more impartial practice, Char suggested, should rely on committee's voting result rather than chairperson's sole decision.

Nancy Poon, the working group chairperson of the Kwai Tsing Dancing Festival, is also the secretary of Tsing Tai Women's Association. (Photo from the Internet)

How the Kwai Tsing District Council handles grants for activities is first setting up several activities working groups, with each of them chaired by a councillor as the working group chairperson. The chairperson is then solely responsible for searching co-organisers. Once confirmed by the working group chairperson, the co-organisers can submit application for grant to the vetting working group under the District Council.

As shown in some of the granting documents that we have obtained, the Art Festival, concerning a grant of $820,000, was co-organised with the Cheung On Women's Club. The working group chairperson, Tam Wai-chun, from the Business and Professionals Alliance for Hong Kong (BPAHK), is exactly the chairperson of the Cheung On Women's Club.

Dennis Leung (middle; in black suits) explained it is hard to find other organisations which is willing to pay in advance. (Photo from the Internet)

Other examples include: scheduled in coming July and August, the teenage local administrative participation training course, concerning a $100,000 funding, is contracted to the community service association of On Yam Estate. The chairperson of the Society turns out to be Dennis Leung from the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions, the working group chairperson.

In response to the issue, Dennis Leung explained the decision of contracting the Festival out to the community service association of On Yam Estate is mostly due to the importance to have a credible and reliable co-organiser.

“There are difficulties to replace the current practice with other societies. While the District Council proposes activities under the system, the Home Affairs Department (HAD) is not willing to bear the follow-up work. As payment for the activity has to be settled in advance, it adds burden to do so… And some of the activities require a huge social network which cannot be fulfilled by ordinary NGOs.” Dennis Leung has just relieved from his office as the chairperson of the On Yam Estate Community Service Association.

Law King-shing thought the practice is not a problem at all as long as the application follows the instruction and the counsellor reports disclosure of Interests (Photo by Lam Chun-yuen @ Ming Pao)

Law King-shing, Vice-Chairperson of the Kwai Tsing District Council (from DABHK), said, “I doubt if there is many local groups willing to organize these activities. We welcome them if there is. But the fact is they have to have experience and money and also willingness to pay in advance.” As he stated, the District Council has a report system with strict regulation on expenditure and it is impossible for anyone to make a profit out of it.

Chu Lai-ling said  the frequent “associated societies” practice is only leading to money loss and no profit at all for personal and political promotion. (Photo by Lam Chun-yuen @ Ming Pao)

Chu Lai-ling, district councilor from DABHK, also contracted an activity out to the Wa Lai Residents Association, of which she is the chairperson. She stated in her reply that the activity cannot be used in personal promotion and thus there should be no benefit for political promotion in having her own society organising the activity.

“Activities of the District Council should be in open application, treating everyone on the same basis and providing equal information to all qualified societies. If not, there would be an impression of injustice,” said Char. He believed that the choice of co-organisers should rest with a committee with a fair grading system instead of the working group chairperson solely.

The Chief Executive Officer of DPHK Lam Cheuk-ting, the former Investigator of the ICAC commented that it is terrible to have the working group chairperson searching “associated societies” in co-organizing activities under the District Council. As the working group chairperson, the district councillor should take the role of a monitor towards the particular society which organises such events.

“If I were both the working group chairperson and the person-in-charge of the society, there would be a conflict in roles and interests. And the HAD is failing to fulfill its duty in prohibiting such situation.” Lam believed that the ICAC should closely review the problems in the system given that when the District Council makes decision on granting for activities, more than one society should be searched for with transparent procedures.

The "HKU" June 4th Vigil: Observations

The "HKU" June 4th Vigil: Observations

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by CityU SU Editorial Board (30th)
Original: https://www.facebook.com/cityusueb/posts/667144190083243 
[The "We" mentioned in the article refers to CityUSU EB]

(CityU SU EB)

There are around 2,000 participants in the HKU June 4th Vigil (HKUJ4 Vigil; Tian'anmen Massacre happens on June 4th 1989), but people might wonder what is so special about it. CityUSU Editorial Board sends out our correspondents to three main vigil venues. We are not the host but believe the HKUJ4 Vigil is a subject worth discussion, hence we give our observation and comments below.

(1) Identity: Brooding on and thinking from the identity of Hongkonger

"Re-positioning" the identity of Hongkongers could be said as the main reason that leads to the HKUJ4 Vigil. We think this Vigil focuses more on what does Tian'anmen Massacre mean to us today, and on inspiring the participants and defining the value of Tian'anmen Massacre through discussions; where the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (the Alliance; the host in Victoria Park) focuses on those particular moments in 1989, with aims to pursuing the accountability and strengthening people's memory. Therefore, the HKUJ4 Vigil carries on from the topic of Tian'anmen Massacre, and relates it to the current issues in our society. Comparing to the one in Victoria Park, you can see there is a difference on focuses: [Hongkongers/Chinese]; [Now/Then]. We are not saying that the HKUJ4 Vigil does not focus on those moments in 1989, but there are less emphasis.

(2) Method: Non-sentimental; no "political gains" for organisations

The HKUJ4 Vigil is a good starting point - with a more serious academic discussion, participants re-shape Hongkongers in different eras and identities, and have efficiently constructed a inter-generational discussion platform, which establish the significance and meaning of the June 4th vigil in relation to this day and age. There are some drawbacks too -- most of them are personal discourse without genuine interaction, but still, it is better than those organised by the Alliance or Civic Passion. This Vigil does not use gimmick to rally people to vent anger on the society, the establishment and the CCP. The Victoria Park (the Alliance) and Tsim Sha Tsui (Civic Passion) vigil use the commemoration as a tool to gather people. Confrontation starts from one's stance, but if mature discussion is skipped, it would become formulaic and superficial, thus hinders support and understanding.  Undeniably, these organisations have been at work dispensing their discourse via radio programmes and online articles. But when the public and the media did not accord them appropriate and sufficient attention, people could easily have doubts on their confrontation stance and action. Some might consider the discourse in the HKUJ4 Vigil might be considered as a waste of time, but we think it is the discussion platform Hong Kong needs.

What is worth mentioning: there were NO SING-ALONG; NO MEANINGLESS APPLAUSE; NO SLOGAN-CHANTING; NO GIMMICKS. They try to provide more academic support to the current "radical" confrontation and stance. But when they put aside the conventional rally model, how shall such vigil congeal Hongkongers? These are food for thought.

This is the first time Hong Kong Federation of Students abstaining from Tian'anmen Massacre vigil; this is the first time HKUSU starting its own vigil. New model of vigil has shown the change of era. The thought of "constructing a democratic China" has reached the critical point.

Chan Ya-ming: In Memorial of the Once-Innocent Joshua Wong

In Memorial of the Once-Innocent Joshua Wong

Translated by Samuel L., edited by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, written by Chan Ya-ming
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/03-28-2015/22040/ 

As Eileen Chang (a renowned Chinese writer) once said,”it’s better to be famous early.” Eighteen-year-old Joshua Wong has already been ‘The World’s Top 10 Leader’ and ‘The Hundred Leading Global Thinker’ today. I yet miss the fifteen-year-old Joshua. His opposition to nationalist education at the age of fifteen has shocked everyone. While we were ashamed by his innocent appearance, he was our hope, he was, once, my hope as well...

Coming across his photo on Comment on the Apple Daily lately, I was shocked to recognise that such youngster is also getting ‘older’. He once made Yu Yi-wa, a pro-Beijing teacher, in total outrage at the City Forum, an RTHK live programme in Victoria Park. He once showed his political wit in bowing to instead of shaking hands with CY Leung. He once had an innocent and broad smile.

One may not like how he is right now, but one must like the fifteen-year-old Joshua. Instead of growing a lot in the past three years, he has actually become older. Social movements exhausted his time in studying and thinking. Depth of his thinking has almost been stagnant since fifteen years old. But as a leader in an organisation, the more people he met, the more evasive he handles, and the more cautious he speaks. After all, he actually becomes more sophisticated. Once becoming sophisticated, he gets older.

I clearly remember the day when I recognised that the innocent Joshua shall no longer return. It was the last siege of the government headquarter, the most tragic one. While friends and dissidents were beaten up to broken heads and blood, Joshua announced a hunger strike. Such a tragedy full of political calculation simply disgusted me, and it is a total insult to all protesters who shed their blood for democracy of Hong Kong.

I latterly heard him saying that he ‘still loves China’ during a televised interview. It is to me that he is getting more and more sophisticated, more and more close to a politician. I don’t reckon Joshua embracing a ‘cultural China’ as Tang Jun-yi does. I don’t reckon him being so lovesick to China as Ching Cheong is, let alone leading revolution in China as Yang Kuang did. His verbal love to China disturbed me. It is either he lacks critical thinking, or he is speaking to the Chinese communist.

These few months after the Umbrella Revolution, I have been imagining how democratic movement in Hong Kong will be under the leadership of Joshua Wong. I observed all actions of the Scholarism. It ends up only to be developing new medium, endearing Agnes Chow and styling Joshua Wong. ‘Scholarism’ turns to be a business. Focusing on marketing, it is only one step from listing. Do we really have nothing else to do in the past months here in Hong Kong? Where is Joshua when we still live in this world invaded by Individual Visit Scheme?

The answer is: sitting back at home and sharing violent videos of protesters in rehabilitation activities.

Joshua Wong is a saint is what I finally realise. A moral halo is fabricated by global media on him. Rehabilitations are simply too filthy for him, no matter they succeeded or not. He desires eternal social movements. Social movement is to become his prospect, politician is to become his forever occupation. Yesterday, such shameless Joshua Wong even said,’ lastly, I remember that the Fortune magazine was titled as  ‘The Death of Hong Kong’ in summer 1995, envisaging a huge regression of Hong Kong after the 1997 handover. But today, I can firmly tell the editors of the Fortune magazine that your judgements on Hong Kong were totally wrong. Hong Kong will never die, as Hongkongers will be the eventual victors.’

I dare ask Joshua, "In what ways shall we be the victor? Through hunger strike?"

It has already been half a year. Hongkongers are in utter failure. Instead of seeing any hope, I eliminate all hope constructed upon the projection of myself on the leaders’ pretences. A real rebel never deceives himself with hope. Hope is to be, or not to be. Such applies to roads on ground; For actually the earth had no roads to begin with, but when men pass one way, a road is made.

How Raymond Wong sees Tian'anmen Massacre Vigil in HK (2013)

How Raymond Wong sees Tian'anmen Massacre Vigil in HK

Translated by LegCo Translation and Interpretation Dept, spoken by Raymong Wong Yuk-man
Original: http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr12-13/english/counmtg/hansard/cm0529-translate-e.pdf 

(29 May 2013)

 Deputy President, commemoration of the 4 June incident has taken root on our land. 

 The motion on the 4 June incident is an annual expression of political stance. The pan-democrats perform the ritual every year, while the royalists dodge it year after year. It has already become a routine gesture and model response. However, such division has also led to a lazy mindset. Having considered themselves as the embodiment of justice for a long period, the pan-democrats have always marginalized internal disagreements. As the oppression of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the masses in Hong Kong becomes increasingly severe and internal disagreements become stronger, they have no idea how to respond except to demonize them. 

 The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (the Alliance) has almost monopolized the whole commemoration of the 4 June incident held in Hong Kong. The formulaic procedure of its vigil and the centralization of power inside the Alliance have already drawn criticisms from a lot of participants. Ten years ago, when I wished to go onto the stage in the vigil to appeal to the public to take to the streets to "topple TUNG" and oppose the introduction of legislation for Article 23 of the Basic Law, I had to beg sorely the seniors in the Alliance led by SZETO Wah and bargain with them repeatedly in order to get their "gracious approval". 

 Local consciousness has emerged since last year, and the Alliance drew up the puzzling slogan of "Love the country, love the people; Hong Kong spirit" which had evoked a tide of adverse comments. Then CHIN Wan posted an article on Facebook which says, "Commemoration of the 4 June incident must go into the community. The Alliance must draw a clear line between itself and the democratic camp. Otherwise, Hong Kong people should not participate in the vigil on 4 June". A stone tossed into the water has raised a thousand ripples. However, criticisms and responses have often been degenerated to giving vent to sentiments, and the obsolete moral judgment still applies, that is, "attendance in the candlelight vigil is a distinction between humans and beasts". 

 Today, we need to examine deeply into the issues of the commemoration of the 4 June incident. Since the airwaves era, I have strongly advocated abandoning the use of the word "vindication". Firstly, "vindication" implies recognition of the CCP's legal ruling status. Secondly, people with some knowledge of the CCP's history will understand that "vindication" and "reform of the political system" are not necessarily related. In 1978, DENG Xiaoping took advantage of the people's wish to vindicate the 5 April Tiananmen Incident to defeat the "yes-men", but after he had seized power, he turned his back and suppressed the Xidan Democracy Wall. There is the chance that such a historical event will recur in the future. 

 As for the new slogan of "Love the country, love the people; Hong Kong spirit", after the 1989 pro-democracy movement, there was a similar slogan in Hong Kong ― "If China has no democracy, Hong Kong will have no future" ― and after the 4 June incident, it became a defeatist statement which said, "If China has no democracy, Hong Kong will have no democracy either". During the pro-democracy movement, Hong Kong people had a rather complicated mental state …… right now we are discussing the motion on the vindication of the 4 June incident. The Honourable colleagues in the pan-democratic camp should find it very serious, but I do not know what Dr Helena WONG is laughing at. What are you laughing at? Is it very funny? We are discussing the vindication of the 4 June incident here. What are you laughing at? 

(...)

 Let me borrow HUNG Ho-fung's words on Facebook: "4 June 1989 was an important landmark in the establishment of Hong Kong people's subject identity, though it concurrently had the contradictory effects of stimulating Hong Kong's subject consciousness (that means disillusion with the "liberal CCP") and suppressing such subject consciousness (that means tying up democratization in Hong Kong with democratization on the Mainland)." On the other hand, for many Hong Kong people, that was the point of awakening their sense of identity as "Chinese people". 

 However, after the 4 June tragedy, it became an endless misery of "unrequited love". Looking back 24 years later, the 4 June tragedy marked the CCP's failure to grasp the last golden opportunity to mend its way. The so-called "reform within the CCP system" is just a fantasy. In addition, since DENG Xiaoping's inspection in the south in 1992, the whole country only has eyes on money. Corruption is entirely out of control, and the quality of the masses on the Mainland is as low as it can get. Judging from this, even the "civilized China" is gradually dying out in the north of the Shenzhen River. The CCP continues to occupy China by foul means. Competing with a political regime which has monopolized "love for the country" by showing "we love the country more", and cherishing unrequited love for a country which does not deserve our love, will be futile. 

 Every year I will attend the candlelight vigil for only two reasons: first, all beings grieve for their fellows' misfortunes; second, I wish to denounce the "butcher" regime through attending the vigil, in the hope that Hong Kong people will not forget the definite relationship between the 4 June tragedy and the "butcher" regime. 

 Now some people have queried whether the number of people attending the candlelight vigil would actually scare the Community Party, I think they have really set the focus wrong. If the Alliance is willing to make the memorial activities completely local and leave out the theme about love for the country, the Community Party will be more scared. However, requesting them to mend their way, I am afraid, is like expecting the Democratic Party to apologize to the public for betraying the voters three years ago, on which no high hopes can be placed. I hope that people who decide to boycott the candlelight vigil of the Alliance can organize activities on their own to commemorate the 4 June incident with local perspectives. They should not boycott the so-called "memorial activities". 

 The civic society in Hong Kong is a forgotten "casualty". The 1989 pro-democracy movement had awakened the idealistic sentiment of many Hong Kong people, but the following suppression had shattered their ideals and made most Hong Kong people more cynical. Owing to the time constraint, I cannot finish delivering this speech. 

 The 4 June tragedy is a humanitarian disaster. By the standard of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, it is a "crime against humanity". From this angle, we demand the Communist Party to take responsibility.