Archive for the Statement Category

李嘉誠回應撤資聲明 - 此心安處是吾家

Posted in Statement on September 29, 2015 by loso

超連結:中文版英文版

-------------------------------------

經大陸不同官媒早前連日發表文章批評「撤資」後,長和主席李嘉誠終於發表聲明回應,現全文引述如下:

李嘉誠先生就近日一些人對他和集團毫無根據的指責、似是而非的觀點作出回應:

「最近一些人對我本人和集團作出毫無根據的指責,惹來線民及傳媒的關注。在此,我多謝各位的關心,並藉此機會作出回應。首先感謝國內、香港以及國外的朋友對我的肯定和信任,我明白言論自由是一把兩刃刀,因此一篇似是而非的文章,也可引發熱烈討論,這是可以理解的,但文章的文理扭曲,語調令人不寒而慄,深感遺憾。」

集團公共事務部歸納了近日傳媒的查詢,作出以下回應:

1. 為什麼連日受到抨擊也不作回應?

根據我們的分析,是非浪潮來襲之時,正值習近平主席進行國事訪美前夕,我們不想因為李先生的回應,被人借題發揮,引起更廣泛的國際討論。李先生認為,習主席在不同場合多番強調,國家要不斷深化改革,堅定不移提高開放型經濟水準,我們不應讓這些毫無根據的口舌之爭成為焦點,喧賓奪主,沖淡習主席的重要訊息,引起商界和投資者不必要的顧慮;李先生認為,沒有建設性的語言討伐,並不符中國政府不遺餘力推動經濟向前發展的方向和決心。

今次是李先生首次就事件作出回應,網上一切假李先生之名所流傳之文章,均非屬實。

2. 為何頻頻出售內地房地產,但仍否認撤資?

過去十年在香港上市的公司,有超過70%(包括國企)的架構,也選擇離岸設立公司,目的是為了讓企業取得更現代化架構和更高效運作模式;我們做法相同,集團進行重組及于開曼群島成立公司,而集團在港註冊及上市地位不變;李先生個人在重組過程中,並沒有減少持股比例,也沒有從中套現,所謂「撤資」指控,完全不成立。

另外,對於所有投資及出售資產所得的回報,是屬於公司的,並回到股東手中;一如以往,集團將繼續在全球,包括在內地尋找投資機會。過去兩年,集團對全球地產業務持審慎態度,加上內地房地產方面,部份城市出現供求失衡風險,故減少買入土地,但集團在內地的發展中及將發展之總樓面面積遠高於2000萬平方米。

事實上,集團於內地發展中或將發展的土地,90%是從拍賣而來,而90%以上的物業均在建成後出售(酒店除外),只有極少部分保留作收租之用,集團從來也在積極等候土地「交吉」,並沒有囤地(香港亦如是)。減少房地產的投資比重,不等於不投資內地。

其次,在零售方面,集團於全球現擁有逾13,000間零售店鋪,其中內地由兩年前的1300間增加至今天2300間,增幅為77%,擴展步伐迅速。

國家及領導人強調「騰籠換鳥」,深化改革,優化產業,以創新科技驅動經濟增長,我們一直重視全球的優質投資機會和支持人才帶來的發展機會,長和系在港口、基建、零售、科技及金融等方面的發展正大舉前進。

習主席最近提倡「一帶一路」政策,鼓勵企業「走出去」,所以集團投資海外業務,與國家政策並無抵觸,而且集團的股東也清楚,海外投資的盈利均屬香港上市公司所有,最終通過派息,能令股東受惠。集團以香港為家,於1980年代已開始在國際投資及發展電訊、貨櫃碼頭、能源、零售、水廠、電網、地產、火車、飛機租賃等業務,遍及52個國家,這是集團同仁30多年努力經營的成果。

3. 內地官媒多次作出抨擊,李先生與中央關係是否有變?

李先生對中央堅定不移繼續改革開放,致力優化營商環境有信心,並不相信文革式思維復蘇;個別人士的言行,不代表國家方向。習主席多次強調中國將繼續維持深化改革的堅定承諾,擴大開放;李先生對中國充滿信心,對習主席沉穩的領導能力深感佩服。

4. 部份抨擊言論質疑你「不愛國」,有何回應?

李先生兒時歷經戰亂,然後目睹國家改革三十多年翻天覆地的變化,國家天天進步,內心觸動不已。對於一切是是非非,李先生雖感到痛心,但認為蘇軾及白居易說得好:「此心安處是吾家」以及 「我身本無鄉,心安是歸處」。

「萬變社會,不變承諾」是李嘉誠先生在1980年創立基金會時對自己的格言,他更於2006年宣佈基金會是他的第三個兒子,當年已把三分一資產,即超過90億美元投放於基金會。基金會致力推動奉獻文化,至今捐出逾170億港元,當中87%用於大中華地區,還傾注大量時間、心血,對有利於中華民族的事業,過去、現在、未來,宗旨不渝。

主要專案包括創辦汕頭大學,於廣東引入以色列理工學院,推動國家高校教育改革,帶動國家創新產業發展,為主導未來作好準備;基金會同時重視醫療研究及服務,鼓勵探索追求健康的世界,項目包括內地「人間有情」寧養計畫,協助全國貧困家庭唇齶裂兒童康復的「重生行動」,以及協助殘障人士的「長江新里程」等等。

 

-完-

 

Mr Li Ka-shing would like to respond to recent misleading viewpoints criticizing our Group of withdrawing from China, which generated immense interest and discussion in the media and on the internet.

 

Mr Li is grateful to a lot of his friends from China, Hong Kong and all over the world who have repeatedly expressed to him their trust, support and concern. Mr Li understands that “Broader Freedom of expression gives voice to everyone – regrettably even for false accusations”. The following summarises our response to the many questions as requested by the media.

 

  1. Why have you not responded earlier amidst the barrage of criticisms?

 

We want to avoid this wave of misinformation thwarting President Xi Jingping’s message on deepening of economic reforms during his state visit to USA. President Xi has on many occasions stressed that China will stay committed to the path of reforms and opening up; we are vigilant not to let these unfounded allegations escalate to cause investors’ concerns and militate against President Xi’s positive message to the business community and investors at large. Mr Li believes that the Chinese government is dedicated to deepening of economic reforms and openness. The dated viewpoints and negative language used in the article are not representative of the progressive economic policies of the Chinese government.

 

This is our first response to the brouhaha, other articles circulating on the web are not responses from us.

 

  1. How can you deny withdrawing when you are selling mainland property developments?

 

For over ten years, over 70% of the companies listing in Hong Kong (including Mainland State Owned Enterprises) have chosen to register using BVI vehicles. The reason for companies to choose this method is for greater flexibility. The reorganisation of our Group using Cayman Islands companies does not change the fact that the Group is still registered and listed in Hong Kong. Mr Li, through the reorganisation process has not reduced his holdings nor reaped any proceeds, therefore there is no truth in the “withdrawal” accusations.

 

Furthermore, proceeds from normal business activities are returned to the Company’s shareholders. The Company, as always, will continue to look for investment opportunities around the world including Mainland China. Over the past two years, the Group has been more prudent towards property investments as certain property markets in the Mainland have supply and demand imbalances. To date, the Group property projects are about 20 million square meters gross floor area.

 

90% of the land acquisitions of our Group in Mainland China are through auctions and 90% of the properties developed (with the exception of hotel projects) are sold. Only a very small portion is kept for rental revenues. The Group has never hoarded empty lots, we are always eagerly awaiting to take possession of the land we auctioned for development. Reducing property investments does not imply we are not investing in the Mainland.

 

Our Group has over 13,000 retail stores worldwide and over the past 24 months, the Group has grown its number of retail stores in the Mainland rapidly by 77% from 1300 to 2300 stores.

 

Chinese leaders have likened the deepening of economic reforms and innovations to the morphing nature of the bird cage and the cyclically regeneration or rebirth of the phoenix. Our Group has always been on the lookout globally for investment opportunities and support innovation, we will continue to invest in ports, infrastructure, retail, technology and financial opportunities.

 

One Belt, One Road (also know as the Belt and Road Initiative) development strategy as outlined by President Xi encourages companies to broaden investments outside China. Since 1980s, Hutchison has been proactive in seizing global investment opportunities in telecom, ports, natural resources, retails, water, grid, real estate, leasing and to date is operating in 52 countries.

 

  1. Has Mr Li’s relationship with the Central Government turned sour now that official Mainland media have repeatedly criticized him?

 

We are confident that the leadership in China is and will commit to improving governance and continue on a path of economic reform. Individual viewpoints expressed in the article are not in line with the reform sentiments.

 

  1. What is Mr Li’s response to criticism that he is “unpatriotic”?

 

Mr Li grew up amid the turmoil of war – the great tug of war with destiny and the taste of poverty are memories hard to forget. Now we are witnessing the phenomenal growth of China, He believes together we can build a wonderful world for everyone, for generations to live with dignity, freedom and happiness in our beautiful and beloved country.

 

These false accusations pained him, but he can always find always find solace in the words of great poets Su Shi (蘇軾) and Bai Ju Yi (白居易), “Home is where the heart dwells and home is where one’s heart can find peace.”

 

“Changing Times, Unchanging Promise” was the guideline of the Li Ka Shing Foundation Mr Li founded in 1980. In 2006, he announced that he considers the Foundation to be his “third son”, and pledged to donate one-third of his assets, or about US$9 billion, to the Foundation. The Foundation is committed to cultivating a culture of giving, and has granted over HK$17 billion, 87% of which benefits projects in the Greater China region. Whether in the past, present or future, Mr Li dedicates a vast amount of his personal time and effort to advancing initiatives that benefit China and her people.

 

Shantou University, one of the Foundation’s keystone projects, is collaborating with Tehnion – Island Institute of Technology, to instigate reforms in the mainland’s tertiary education sector and to spearhead the country’s innovation industries into the future.

 

Initiatives dedicated to advancing medical research and services for a healthier world also continue to be a primary focus of the Foundation. Major projects include “Heart of Gold” – National Hospice Service Program, Project New Life, to provide free cleft lip and palate operations for children from impoverished families, and Cheung Kong New Milestone Program, to support people with disabilities.

 

[End]

醫學,本來就是一場革命

Posted in Statement on September 13, 2014 by loso

【聯署】中大醫學院學生就人大對香港政改決策一事聲明

【醫學發展 源於變革】

醫學,本來就是一場革命。

回首醫學的歷史,不難發現其發展都是由一個又一個的變革推動著。解剖屍體,曾經是多麼的大逆不道;器官移植,曾經是多麼的異想天開;微創手術,曾經是多麼不肖的旁門左道。這些醫學變革的先驅者,即使要遭受多少世人的懷疑、白眼與嘲笑,也無懼無俱,堅守信念,懷著寬宏的器量與遠大的目光,一直走來,走到今天。而今天,我們面對著一個更嚴峻的挑戰。

【政改陷阱 漠視民意 】

八月三十一 日,全國人民代表大會常務委員會(人大常委)就香港政改作出決定,全票通過對2016年立法會產生辦法不作修改,而2017年行政長官提名委員會之人數、構成和委員產生辦法,則按照2012年行政長官選舉委員會釐定。維持四大界別的小圈子提委會以及規定特首候選人必須得到過半數的提委支持,方能參選特首選舉,候選人數目限為兩至三名。

這個決定無疑正如坊間所言:連落三閘 - 提委會組成不變,出閘門檻提高,候選人數目限制。完全無視大專學界早前投票結果:逾一萬五千名同學支持公民提名,及提名委員會由一人一票而票值均等的選舉產生。亦忽視六二二全民投票的聲音:逾七十萬市民支持含有公民提名元素的普選方案。

【寧缺勿濫 堅持原則】

這個決議比以往幾屆特首選舉的提名程序更為倒退。過去的提名門檻只是八分之一選委,對候選人人數亦無任何規定。再者,這個決議亦是完全扼殺平等政治權利之體現,是默許不民主的提名委員會操控誰人可以成為特首候選人,此舉是嚴重限制不同政見人士參選特首的機會。

我們拒絕「袋住先」,亦絕不會滿足於可以「一人一票選特首」的糖衣,因為我們確信這是毒藥,因為我們深明儘管他日我們能手握一票選特首,但在這不公義的提名程序下,這一票,是絕對無法體現我們的真正選擇。

對此,我們深感失望及憤怒。

【社會病危 刻不容緩】

我們明白,參與學運從來都要付出代價。我們更明暸,醫學生,參與學運所需付出的代價或許更大,為補償缺席課堂而溫習所花費的時間更多,但對社會及同儕所帶來的影響將會深遠。

我們一直認為,醫護人員的專業知識及對病人的愛心,從來並不只限應用於醫院內,更可走出「白色巨塔」,將專業知識及對病人的愛心,轉化成改變社會的力量,及對社會每個獨立個體的關懷。因為我們確信:醫學,就是以人為本,由人出發,是一個對人關懷的學科和專業。所謂妙手仁心,就是「仁」的體現。這份「仁愛」不單只限於對病況的關注,更是對病人生活的關懷;不單只存在於我們工作的醫院裡,更可體現於我們生活的社會中。

【認清責任 坐言起行】

醫學生罷課,在很多人看來是不負責任的行為。我們可以預計最先被冠上的罪名是浪費社會資源,要知道解剖機會可一不可再,無言老師的獻身亦需受尊重;病房實習的安排不容更改,動輒缺席便是未盡對未來病人的責任。的確,我們未來執業之時,應抱著專業的知識及豐富的經驗,用雙手去實踐我們對病人的承諾,否則便是辜負了病人及社會對醫護人員的期許。

然而,罷課行動並非不負責任,而其背後願意為社會犧牲的精神更是值得欣賞及尊敬的。我們相信決定罷課的同學並沒有忘記身為醫學生的身份及責任,只是在這非常時期迫不得已的取捨,他們都願意身體力行去証明醫學生都是關心社會的一群,願望犧牲在課堂上學習的時間,在罷課後決心付額外的時間和努力,讓自己成為稱職醫護人員的一群。

同時,我們明白醫學生於社會中的獨特身份,亦理解醫學生因課程及專業的要求,在參與學運方面有所制肘;但其實除了罷課外,仍有其他方法去表達我們對社會的關注及支持。每天出門上課前,於胸前扣上黃絲帶,默默地為身邊同學打氣;響應簽名聯署或穿黑衣上課等運動,是對罷課同學無聲卻最有力的支持。這些都是不影響正常課堂,卻能引起關注的集體行動,繼而達至對中央政府表達訴求的效果。為爭取普選略盡綿力,甚至聲援參與罷課的同學,其實都很簡單。

【相信真理 捉緊命運】

我們相信,在大時代前,關注及了解,是回應的第一步。
我們一直相信,醫學生都有一顆渴望服侍人的心,有一份對人的純粹關懷。
我們都相信,這份價值,並非來自革命的熱情或衝動,並非只是一層美麗朦朧的輕霧。
你是否想過:在你的時代裏,在你的社會裏,你會抵抗些甚麼,堅持些甚麼?
就讓我們站起來,親手捉緊命運。

中大醫學生政改關注組
二零一四年九月十二日

行義遵道 匡救香港

Posted in Statement on September 12, 2014 by loso

香港大學學生會罷課宣言:行義遵道 匡救香港
The Hong Kong University Students’ Union
Students’ Strike Declaration

8月31日,170名人大常委「充分考慮了香港社會的有關意見和建議」後,全票通過對2016年立法會產生辦法不作修改,而2017年行政長官提名委員會之人數、構成和委員產生辦法,則按照2012年行政長官選舉委員會釐定。候選人數目限為兩至三名,均須獲過半數提委支持。北京掌聲雷動一時,香港市民義憤填膺。人大連落三閘,戳破港人三十多年來「又傾又砌」,以期「民主回歸、爭取雙普選」的夢幻泡影。京官侈言「中央是香港最大的民主派」、「提名委員會是塊美玉,越看越可愛」等謬論,更是挑戰港人良知和道德底線。

去年底政改諮詢啟動,政府當時聲言「不設既定立場」,大專學界繼而舉辦公投,逾一萬五千名同學支持公民提名,及提名委員會由一人一票而票值均等的選舉產生。同學們亦制訂學界方案,於各區擺放街站,以闡釋信念和堅持。事隔半年,國務院卻於六月初發表《一國兩制在香港特別行政區的實踐白皮書》,企圖二次制憲,結果激起港人反撲。逾七十萬市民參與民間公投、支持公民提名,要求立法會否決不符合國際標準的選舉方案。七一遊行中,五十一萬市民披風冒雨走上街頭,要求落實包含公民提名的真普選,無懼中共恫嚇,捍衛港人自主。連月來,政改諮詢漸漸褪去「有商有量」糖衣,暴露「我是你非」的本相。

港人爭取民主卅年,港大學生一直參與其中。1984年,學生會致函總理趙紫陽支持民主回歸,指出將來港府最高行政首長應由普選產生,獲趙氏答以「民主治港是理所當然的」。《基本法》草擬期間,港大同學亦擔任諮詢委員會學生代表。三十載彈指飛逝,當年學長如今已年過不惑,香港民主卻仍在十字路口徘徊,前途未卜。

七月二留守遮打道行動中,我們目睹同窗為我城未來甘願犯險,強權卻絲毫不為所動,甚至變本加厲打壓民主。當不義成為事實,反抗就是義務。我們將以罷課承接七二留守遮打道行動,掀開一連串不合作運動的帷幕。北京一錘定音,港府俯首領旨,蔑視港人聲音,企圖獨斷香港前程。有鑑及此,我們本赤子之心,以罷課行動引領大眾正視社會議題,只為堅持推動我城民主進程:

一・公民提名 寸步不讓

提委會按照選委會維持1200人,四大界別比例不變,無疑是舊酒新瓶,侮辱港人智慧。港人期盼的普選當包括平等之提名權、選舉權及被選舉權,絕非「讓一部分人先民主起來」、任由權貴把持香港前程。若然未來提名委員會構成一如既往,行政長官候選人經權貴篩選,再由一人一票「選出」,根本無助解決管治危機。公民提名確保平等選舉權及被選舉權,直接反映公民意志,消除政治特權階級,是達至真普選的出路。

二・促請立法會否決不符國際標準的普選方案

六二二民間公投中,近七十萬人要求立法會否決不符國際標準的普選方案。可是,無論是人大決定之草案文本,抑或全國人大常委會副秘書長李飛就草案的書面說明,均企圖淡化同樣重要的被選舉權和平等的提名權,隻字不提2017年後特首選舉方式可再修改。所謂「袋住先」,實質是「袋一世」!方案一旦獲得通過成普選定案,將適用於2017年以後的行政長官及立法會選舉,不義政制豈非千秋萬世,無了期延續?

三・2016年起立法會全面直選

立法會本是代議士濟弱扶傾,彰顯公義之地。無奈功能組別及分組點票制度,令建制陣營把持議會,屢次為政權保駕護航,形成少數推翻多數的畸態,近年更多次否決捍衛新聞自由等為保護香港核心價值的議案。同時,部分已在港式微的界別如漁農界等仍於議會佔有為數不少的議席,足見功能界別劃分頗為過時。政制改革不僅限於行政長官選舉方法,立法會產生方法亦深深影響我城命運。港人爭取落實雙普選逾卅年,功能組別必須廢除,全面直選刻不容緩。

我等學子本抱着簡單的願景,冀望在安定生活中求知修業;我們享受在舍堂競技體育、談文論藝,期盼透過上莊等途徑服務同學、一展抱負。然而,我城赤霧氳氤風雨飄搖,黑白是非真偽顛倒,一直恪信的價值觀日益動搖。港大校訓既為眀徳格物,時值香港命運轉捩點,我們豈能自樂於校園一隅,袖手旁觀?當公義慘被踐踏、自由痛遭剝削,我們決心以罷課明志。

普選細則現已被人大篤定,我等冀以罷課凝聚學生力量、喚醒社會各界奮起反抗。我們呼籲全港大專院校學生走上街頭,反抗腐敗政權,並懇請各院校教授、講師予以學生實際支持,例如不因罷課處分學生、參與公民講課、義務為學生補習,甚至投入罷教聲援。同時,我們亦籲請市民大眾出席集會聲援、店鋪掛起標語支持及以各種可行方式響應,並準備抗爭。罷課是我們對政權的最後警告,若當權者仍然一意孤行,下一步就是接踵而來的抗命行動。身負時代使命,我們別無他選,亦無法退讓。

香港大學學生會
二零一四年九月三日

Photo Credit: November-13 @ Flickr

On 31 August, 170 members of NPCSC passed a resolution and ruled out any further amendments to the electoral method of Legislative Council in 2016 and a strict compliance of the composition, and selection method of 2017 Nominating Committee with those of 2012 Election Committee for Chief Executive Election. The number of Chief Executive candidate is restricted to two or three, each of whom is required to gain majority support from the Nomination Committee. The decision was welcomed in Beijing in a big round of applause, yet stirred up anger among Hong Kong citizens. As NPCSC imposes these three barricades, Hong Kong’s dream for genuine democracy and the realization of Universal Suffrage simply diminish into a fantasy.

At the beginning of public consultation on political reform last year, the officials claimed that there would be no presumed “position”. Local tertiary institutions thus initiated a student referendum, in which over 15,000 students voted in support of “civil nomination”, a Nominating Committee to be elected based upon “one person one vote”, and “equality in vote worth”. As such, the Students’ Proposal was premised on these principles. For half a year, we keep promoting our belief and the rationales behind the proposal to the general public. Despite of this, the State Council issued the “White Paper on the Practice of ‘One Country, Two Systems’ Policy in Hong Kong”, with an intention to repudiate understanding of Basic Law. What followed were the 22 June Civil Referendum with approximately 700,000 votes endorsing civil nomination and 1 July Protest with 510,000 marching on the street amid heavy rainstorms.

Over the past three decades, HKU students have always been playing an active role in the democratic development of Hong Kong. In 1984, our predecessors wrote to Zhao Ziyang, the late Premier of the PRC at the time, to reaffirm the importance of “people ruling Hong Kong by democratic means” and to propose a universal suffrage to elect the government and its Chief; Zhao gave a positive response to these appeals. During the drafting of the Basic Law, HKU students were appointed as student representatives in the Consultative Committee. Thirty years elapsed, the once young activists are already in their middle age; sadly, the democratic development in Hong Kong remained stagnated.

Our students risked their future in the July 2 protest, whereas the government simply turned a blind eye to and even suppressed the call for democracy. “When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty”. The student strike will lift the curtain on the upcoming disobedience activities. As the Hong Kong government surrenders and kowtows to Beijing, ignoring the voice of local voice, we students pledge to arouse public awareness on the democratic development of Hong Kong by means of strike:

1. We insist on Civil Nomination

The composition of Nominating Committee, consisting of 1200 people from the four sectors, resembles that of the Election Committee. This practice is no less than putting old wine in new bottle, an insult to every local citizen. The universal suffrage that we demand must affirms equality of right to be nominated, to be elected and that to elect. We have zero tolerance to the idea of “partial democracy enjoyed only by some people”, nor that only the rich and powerful could dictate Hong Kong’s future. Shall the composition of the Nominating Committee remain the same as that of the Election Committee for Chief Executive in 2012, where the privileged ones will always screen the candidates before the general public could vote, there will never be fundamental changes to remedy the current governance crisis. Civil nomination ensures public will and support, while preventing the emergence of political privileged class. This marks a step towards achieving genuine universal suffrage.

2. We urge the Legislative Council to veto over a proposal that does not comply with the International Standard

In 6.22 Referendum, about 700 thousand people demanded veto over an universal suffrage proposal that fails to fulfil the International Standard. However from the draft resolution of Standing Committee of National People’s Congress or the written explanation by Vice Chairman of the Commission of Legislative Affairs of the NPCSC, Li Fei, it is evident that the importance of the right to be elected and elect has been downplayed. Not even a word in the proposal mentioned that the election method can be amended after 2017. Clearly, short-term and superficial interests should not outweigh our strong demand for true democracy.

3. We demand a directly elected on all seats of Legislative Council by 2016

The purpose of the Legislative Council is where councillors represents the unheard, serve the needy, and practice justice. It is ironic that Functional Constituency and the existing voting mechanism allows the pro-establishment camp to manipulate the Council and protect the authorities. It leads to a ridiculous situation where the minority overriding majority opinion. In recent years, motions to protect core values like press freedom were vetoed by pro-establishment power. Many diminishing industries such as Agriculture and Fisheries Constituency also count a lot of seats in the Council, manifesting the obsoleteness in Functional Constituency. Political Reform shall not be limited to only Chief Executive election, but also the method selecting Legislative Councillors that have great influence on Hong Kong’s destiny. The pursuit for true democracy practising in universal suffrage has started thirty years ago, and we believe Functional Constituency shall be eliminated and all Legislators be directly elected.

We students all share a simple dream: to pursue knowledge in stability. We certainly enjoy various hall and society activities; we are as well, concerned about the very place that we are living in. In times of crisis when truth is distorted, our school motto “Sapience and Virtue” reminds us to cling onto justice, stand up for virtues we truly treasure. When justice and freedom are being flagrantly abused, we strive to put on students strike to show our determination.

Despite that Standing Committee of National People’s Congress set the definitive tone for universal suffrage, we now wish to unite all students and voice out for our fellows. We encourage every member from local universities to raise against our corrupted government. We urge all teachers, professors and tutors to support the students by not penalizing them for their absence, but arrange make-up tutorials sessions for them and even join the the strike to amplify the voice. We call for the participation from each and every citizen to join our assemblies, all shops to put on banners, posters or any means which shows the support to student strike. Student Strike is our last warning to the regime. If they continue to act against public’s will, we will step up to a stronger disobedient action. We are determined to stand firm and hold on to our belief, for we it is not just for our time, but the many generations to come.

The Hong Kong University Students’ Union
3 September 2014

真的假不了;假的真不了

Posted in Statement on March 18, 2010 by loso

A calculated spin.

1)

2)

The wordings:

各位傳媒界嘅朋友,大家好。由3月16號到到𠵱家,我一直無公開露面,主要嘅原因,係因為經過3月11號同埋12號呢兩日,見到咁多位嗰種盡忠職守嘅採訪表現,令我憂慮到,如果唔係喺一個安排好嘅情况之下公開現身,可能會影響到大家自身嘅安全,引起混亂,又或者導致到使用緊同一個公共空間、又或者喺私人空間嘅其他朋友不便。所以我希望藉住今日呢個咁有秩序嘅安排同大家見面,滿足大家喺工作上嘅需要。喺往後嘅日子,大家唔再需要喺我屋企門口度等,咁多日以嚟辛苦咗大家。

正如先前Ivan所講,由於案件仍然喺調查嘅階段,所以請大家見諒,我今日唔能夠提及有關案件嘅任何細節。不過有一口的大家有興趣知道嘅事,我都仲係可以一提嘅。例如,3月12號,點解我離開ICAC嘅時候,會戴住口罩嘅呢?

我知道好多朋友喺出面等緊我,所以離開當日呢,我係嘗試整理一下自己嘅儀容,不過好可惜,我唔小心,用剃刀割損咗塊面,我戴住口罩,係避免大家誤會我面上嘅傷痕係嚟自ICAC。大家喺媒體上面睇到嘅報道唔一定係事實,喺12號至到17號期間,所有嘅報道都指出,我係藏身家中,事實上並唔係咁。我一如以往,有外出同朋友見面,出街食飯,唔單止係17號、亦即係噚晚畀傳媒影到嘅嗰一晚,仲去過公立醫院嗰度覆診添,至於其他與事實不符嘅報道,我唔一一舉例說明,喺呢度,我由衷咁向連日以嚟同我發出無數短訊、問候、關懷、支持、同對我表示信任嘅朋友,深表謝意。當然,我亦都要好感謝旺角花墟嗰位賣碌柚葉嘅老闆,多謝你嘅買一送一。

我想同大家講,我生活得好好,唔需要為我憂慮,但係講到底,我嘅生活上面係咪完全無起到變化呢?呢一點係無可能㗎,但係想深一層,有邊一個人嘅生活從來無遇上過變化呢?如果你都遇上咗一口的變化,一口的莫名奇妙嘅變化,請你唔好驚,唔好亂,唔好放棄。因為,真的假不了,假的真不了。多謝大家嘅支持、關懷同鼓勵。

維護香港核心價值宣言

Posted in Statement on June 7, 2004 by loso

維護香港核心價值,我們不肶沉默!

我們憂慮,但我們並不悲觀!

眼看管治每況愈下,市民挫折感日增,我們憂心忡忡

香港回歸中國七年了。去年「七一」大遊行,港人表達了强烈的命運共同體意識,表達了對香港未來的無限關切。近月來,我們對香港未來的擔憂卻有增無減。眼看着香港社會的核心價值備受衝擊,港人所追求的目標似乎離我們愈來愈遠,市民的無力感與挫折感日趨沉重。我們憂心忡忡。核心價值的動搖,正在削弱香港的管治質素與營商環境,並破壞社會的制度理性與凝聚力。我們認為,關鍵時刻已娙到來,捍衛香港核心價值的警鐘已經響起。

香港優勢,與現代文明接軌,有賴核心價值

香港在過去發展過程中積累了一些成功的經驗,港人不懈的追求造就了有香港特色的地方文化,而支撐這些經驗和文化的,是港人引以自豪,也與全球現代化文明接軌的一些體現香港優勢的核心價值。它門包括:自由民主、人權法治、公平公義、和平仁愛、誠信透明、多元包容、尊重個人、恪守專業。愈來愈多港人亦已認同,在追求生活質素提升的同時,也應本著可持續發展的目標價值,強調公民參與,致力跨代社會公義,尋求人本的經濟發展,並重視環境保護及人與自然的和諧。

失去核心價值,也就失去了「香港」

我們認為,香港不只是一個經濟城市,也是六百多萬港人安身立命,追尋生活意義,為下一代建設美好家園的地方。失去了香港的核心價值,這座城市便變成失去靈魂的軀殼,港人也就失去了「香港」。我們因此不能沉默。維護香港核心價值,也體現港人在中國現代化進程中的文化使命。

我們憂慮,但我們並不悲觀。我們以此宣言,互勉互勵,並向香港市民及各團體作出呼籲:讓我們不分階層界別、不分黨派,皆能在社會、政治、文化及個人生活上的每一個層面,以言論及行動去維護香港的核心價值,並為我們子孫後代負起薪火相傳的責任!


Standing Firm on Hong Kong’s Core Values

Worsening governance and rising frustrations: We are deeply concerned

It has been almost seven years since Hong Kong was returned to China . During the July 1st march last year, Hong Kong people witnessed a strong sense of being a community, sharing the same destiny and collectively expressed great concern about the city’s future. However, one year on, our worry about Hong Kong ‘s future has only increased. We are greatly disturbed by the increasing erosion of Hong Kong ‘s core values. The goals pursued by our community are becoming more distant. The community is filled with a strong sense of helplessness and rising frustration. Our core values are being shaken. The city’s governance and business environment has deteriorated and our society’s institutional rationality and social cohesion has been weakened. We have come to a critical moment. The alarm is now ringing for us to defend Hong Kong ‘s core values.

Our core values: Hong Kong ‘s advantages; Building blocks for modernity

Hong Kong had accumulated a long history of fighting for a better system. The incessant efforts made by the Hong Kong people have produced a unique local culture that is underpinned by some core values most treasured by them and in line with the global modern civilization. These core values include: liberty, democracy, human rights, rule of law, fairness, social justice, peace and compassion, integrity and transparency, plurality, respect for individuals, and upholding professionalism. More and more Hong Kong people are convinced that in their pursuit of a higher quality of life, we must also adhere to the core values essential to sustainable development: broad-based community participation in public affairs, inter-generational equity, economic development with a human focus, environmental protection and reconciliation with nature.

Losing our core values is losing “ Hong Kong ”

We believe that Hong Kong is more than an economic city. It is where over six million people search for a greater meaning in life and build a better home to live in. By losing its core values, Hong Kong will become a city without soul and her people will then lose ‘ Hong Kong ‘. We, therefore, cannot afford to keep silent. Defending these core values is not just for the sake of preserving Hong Kong ‘s way of life, it serves to continue the cultural mission of modernizing the Chinese nation as a whole.

We are deeply distressed, but not in despair. We sign this Declaration in order to give support to each other and convey a key message to everyone and various organizations in Hong Kong : Let us stand firm on our core values. Let us work together, across different sectors and parties, to build our future together. Let us live out Hong Kong ‘s core values in the social, political, cultural and other aspects of our daily life. Let us act now so that tomorrow our children can take pride in what we are defending today!

image

發起人:張炳良、黎廣德、蔡海偉

聯署人:

區潔愛、區結成、歐耀佳、陳黃麗娟、陳麗雲、陳鎮明、陳潔芬、陳漢輝、陳杏芳、陳浩文、陳漢標、陳徐守淇、陳文敏、陳祖為、陳韜文、陳嘉上、陳根錦、陳家樂、陳健民、陳李碧蘭、陳梁淑貞、陳美玲、陳智遠、陳佩儀、陳尚匡、陳樹強、陳善美、陳清橋、陳耀輝、陳彩英、陳永佳、陳偉群、陳詠娟、陳和順、陳以誠、陳淑儀、陳淑嫻、陳淑蘭、周偉立、周敏璇、周淑琼、周賢明、鄭艾倫、鄭嘉莉、鄭銘鳳、鄭宇碩、張黃韻瑤、張炳良、張志強、張志成、張楚勇、張玉貞、張麗萍、張國柱、張國華、張秀儀、張達明、張秉權、張惠嫺、蔡家玲、蔡堅、蔡仞姿、莊陳有、周吳秀珊、周桂深、周麗英、鄒樹基、朱耀明、蔡海瑋、竺永洪、余若薇、方敏生、霍瑞次、方雪原、方約恆、方旻煐、房遠華、馮煒光、馮可立、馮健明、馮德華、馮業興、馮惠賢、傅少蓮、侯智恒、何小芳、何芝君、何嬋妃、何濼生、何寶英、何瑞珠、許恬莉、洪清田、孔繁盛、熊永達、葉建源、葉瑞蓮、翟紹唐、甘偉強、江惠如、古穎慈、古嫣琪、關信基、關小春、關啟文、關蕙芳、關品方、郭志英、郭毅權、郭文傑、郭家麒、郭烈東、郭儀芬、鄺錦華、黎廣德、黎穎瑜、賴錦璋及夫人、林漢堅、林玉貞、林明祥、林昭寰、林明雄、林曼怡、劉振國、劉群貞、劉秀成、劉偉唐、羅祥國、羅致光、羅靜雯、羅健中、羅佩珊、羅淑君、李智明、李健正、李繼雄、李銳華、梁家傑、梁魏懋賢、梁繼昌、梁萬福、梁文道、梁寶山、梁偉怡、梁慧冰、梁恩榮、梁玉麒、李澤敏、李芝蘭、李展華、李志喜、李兆璋、林雲峰、廖雅芬、凌嘉敏、盧子健、羅慧冰、盧英傑、陸恭蕙、駱詠茵、呂大樂、呂炳強、陸順甜、馬家輝、馬妙華、麥業成、李國風、麥列菲菲、文志森、文盧麗萍、繆熾宏、莫偉文、莫宜端、馬偉東、吳俊雄、伍杏修、吳少雲、吳國楝、吳靄儀、吳水麗、吳永輝、伍美美、吳永順、倪江耀、聶依文、白惠芬、蒲錦文、潘潔、潘德娟、石永泰、史泰祖、施文奇、蘇憶棠、舒琪、施南生、譚仲麟、譚香文、鄧文雄、鄧國俊、鄧樹雄、鄧偉棕、鄧怡勳、陶黎寶華、狄志遠、杜立基、湯家驊、唐秀玲、曾冠榮、謝鴻興、謝平廣、詹德隆、蔡錫昌、崔志英、徐詠璇、徐克、黃娟華、黃英琦、黃邦妮、黃品立、王卓祺、王宜珠、黃漢寶、黃匡源、黃洪、黃鴻偉、黃永恩、黃健偉、黃琼芳、黃潔貞、王秉豪、黃樹誠、黃偉國、黃偉權、王惠梅、黃天慧、王影麗、胡淑星、胡良喜、胡恩威、葉健民、楊超發、楊耀武、楊區麗潔、楊善潔、楊偉新、葉善可、楊懿潔、楊偉邦、余儷玲、袁小敏、阮衛華、郁德芬、榮念曾

Alberto, Manab Chakraborty, Elaine Chan, J Chan, Patrick Chan, Alex Chau, Chau Ka Po, Betty Cheung Hop, Y.M. Fong, Glenn Frommer, Fung King Tak, Fung Wing Yee, Peter Steven Higgins, W.S. Lai, Lawrence Lam, Christine Lau, W. Y. Lau, May Lee, Connie Leung, Rita Leung, Miranda Lui, Pinky Lui, Geraldine Mak, Fr. Harold Naylor, Evelyn Ng, Veronica Pearson, Maureen Sabine, Leo Sham, John Shannon, Irene Tong, Tsang Chi On, R. Wadhwa, Martin Wan Kwok Wai, H.C. Wong, Martin Wong, Winnie Wong, Zero Yiu, Cecilia Young, Paul Zimmerman

%d bloggers like this: