2005年12月12日 星期一

為可持續發展、嚴控魚翅和髮菜貿易 倡議參與世貿會議人士不吃魚翅和髮菜

香港可持續發展公民議會認為自由貿易應以可持續發展為最重要的原則,一切令生態失衡、動植物絕種、地球氣候轉變和自然資源不能持續使用的貿易都要嚴格控制,甚至禁止進行。魚翅和菜的貿易就是這類活動,理應受嚴格控制和禁止。我們呼籲世貿部長級會議的與會人士不吃魚翅和菜,香港政府在世貿宴會上不供應魚翅和菜,用行動支持可持續的自由貿易原則。我們的理據如下: 


1.  根據東亞野生貿易研究委員會的調查,全球的鯊魚品種約有373種,《瀕危野生動植物國際貿易公約》列明有9種屬「極度瀕危」、19種屬「瀕危」、37種屬「易危」,但目前卻只有鯨鯊、姥鯊和大白鯊受貿易管制。


2.  據世界自然保護聯盟轄下的鯊魚專家小組曾追蹤出口魚翅到香港的70多個國家,統計出口的魚翅和捕捉的鯊魚數量,發現魚翅的數量遠超鯊魚的數量;統計結果顯示,有數以千萬條鯊魚「不見了」,反映「要鰭唔要鯊」的浪費情況的確存在。


3.  香港是全球最大的鯊魚貿易市場,港人每年食用1400噸魚翅,等於要屠殺大約14萬條鯊魚。而全球每年約1億條鯊魚被捕殺。鯊魚每12年才生育一次,每次生產不足10條。鯊魚被捕捉和獵殺的速度,遠比繁殖速度快。體型最大的鯨鯊和姥鯊,均因被過分捕捉而被列入瀕危物種,市場對魚翅的需求,將轉移到其他不受法例管制的鯊魚品種。


4.  採摘菜是中國沙漠化的一大原因,截至2004年,全國荒漠化土地為263.62萬平方公里,佔國土面積的27.46%。全國沙化土地面積為173.97萬平方公里,佔國土面積的18.12%。國家林業局提供的資料顯示,上世紀末,沙化土地每年以3,436平方公里的速度擴展,等如每5年就有一個北京市的國土面積因沙化而失去利用價值,全國受沙漠化影響的人口達1.7億。


5.  據統計,內蒙古全區在上世紀90年代後幾年間因為採摘菜而破壞的草原面積達1.95億畝,其中6000多畝已經沙化。


6.  對於菜,國務院已於200091日 發出禁止採集和銷售的禁令。禁止在沙漠邊緣地帶和林地、草原開墾耕地。200511月中經網報導,中國國務院關于進一步加強防沙治沙工作的決定,禁止采集菜,徹底取締菜及其制品的收購、加工和銷售。


7.  內蒙古自治區草原管理條例(2004年修訂)第六章第三十六條明文規定禁止採集、加工、收購和銷售菜,並要求行政區域內重點出入通道設置臨時檢查站,查堵外出或者進入草原地區採集菜的人員。第四十九條更規定違反條例第三十六條第一款、第三十七條第二款規定,集、收購、加工、銷售髮菜,由有關部門依據職權責令其停止違法行為,沒收非法財物和違法所得,可以判處違法所得一倍以上五倍以下的罰款﹔沒有違法所得的,可以判處5萬元以下的罰款﹔給草原所有者或者使用者造成損失的,依法承擔賠償責任﹔構成犯罪的,依法追究刑事責任。


8.  寧夏回族自治區九屆人大常委會第十九次會議( 2005 年11月14 日至16)審議通過了《寧夏回族自治區草原管理條例》,條例明確規定,禁止採集、加工、收購和銷售菜。違反規定在草原上採集菜、濫挖固沙野生植物或者從事破壞草原植被的其他活動的,由縣級以上人民政府草原行政主管部門責令停止違法行為,沒收非法財物和違法所得,判處以違法所得1倍以上5倍以下的罰款。


9.  雖然全國已禁菜,但因菜同“發財”諧音,中國人尤其是廣東人仍然大量吃菜,節日的消耗更甚。香港的酒樓十居其九都有“發財好市”的供應。這樣的消耗直接鼓勵非法採摘菜的活動,令全國禁菜”的規定失效,與國家控制沙漠化的政策措施背道而馳。


因此,香港可持續發展公民議會要求香港政府在世貿談判中採納以下明確立場:


1.         在世貿組織的貿易與環境委員會中,提出限制魚翅貿易的議題,使世貿規則符合保護瀕危動物的原則。


2.         在世貿的框架上,從速訂立禁止輸入髮菜的本地法例。


 


 


2005年12月10日 星期六

成立長春社文化古蹟資源中心

長春社文化古蹟資源中心的成立,標誌着長春社自七十年代起一直致力文物古蹟保育的一個新里程。


長春社為自然環境的保育努力不懈,是為了使我們這一代和子孫后代擁有一個能夠健康發展的生態系統;同樣地、長春社為保育文化遺產付出的心血,是為了使我們這一代和子孫后代不要在高速發展中失卻了文化和歷史的傳承。兩者努力的方向有異,但保育的精神卻是一致的。


在一個高度物質崇拜的社會,追求數字式經濟增長的發展邏輯,使文化保育成為一步一血淚的艱辛過程。可喜的是、近年來香港市民已經越來越清晰地表達了對於尊重社會公義、尊重文化歷史的可持續發展的訴求。這亦是今天資源中心成立的原因。


我們希望這個中心能夠得到各方面的支持,搭建成兩個互相補足的平台一個是資訊的平台,另一個是人的平台。資訊的平台是要整合學者專家的研究成果,與社區民間的動態訊息,提升香港整體對文化遺產的認識與重視。人的平台是為了凝聚各方持份者的力量,使文化古蹟的保育成為公共政策、商界决策、公民社會、以至公私營跨界別合作的主要議題和發展目標。


今天長春社文化古蹟資源中心是一個初生的婴兒,能否快高長大完全倚賴各方的喂哺、特別是市民大眾的支持。在上一世紀七十年代,曾經有一個與長春社共用一家辧公室的「香港文物協會」掙扎了幾年后無疾而終。但是我深信,在二十一世紀、可持續發展的理念己經成為國策與港策的今天,資源中心的預期壽命,將不亞於我們身處的這幢歴史建築,而能夠與香港的文化古蹟保育事業一起成長。


長春社文化古蹟資源中心主席


黎廣德


20051210


 


 


2005年12月8日 星期四

世貿成敗的道德危機

還有五天、香港有史以來舉辧最大型的國際會議便要舉行了。當政府引導傳媒的焦点在示威、衝突、以及「我哋有乜着數」的時侯,总該是我們冷靜下來想一想、究竟在这場被吹噓成「世紀大衝突」的盛會背后、縕藏着什麽道德危機?


 


首先、我們必須認清「自由貿易」究竟意味着甚麽?


 


只要想一想:為甚麽沒有國家追求毒品、核子武器的自由貿易?便知道自由貿易不可被神聖化成為終極目標,而只可以被視為追求国际社會一致認可的目標的工具。那麽、作為一个推動多邊貿易談判的機構,世貿組織究竟追求甚麽目標?


 


這個問題可以從1994年成立世貿組織的馬拉喀什協議找到答案。這个協議清楚表明,世界貿易組織的目的是「提高生活質素、創造全民就業、增加實際收入、刺激多元需求,促進製造、貿易及服務業的增長,同時又保護環境及加強那些在不同程度的經濟發展下,能合乎各方不同切身需要及期望的措施」。簡而言之、世貿就是要通过貿易自由化的手段追求能夠整合經濟繁榮、社會公義、環境保護三者的可持續發展。


 


以這項目標作為尺度,世貿現在的表現是令人十分失望的。


 


對世界上很多國家,尤其是發展中國家而言,本來貿易自由化可有效地使經濟增長,最終使貧窮問題及生活水平得以改善。在特定條件下,貿易自由化能對勞工及環境帶來一些正面影響: 如通過提高資源利用效益及生產力的改善,帶動社會發展及工資增長。它亦可刺激經濟增長及內部投資,創造更多資源投入在環境保護及消減貧窮。可是這些正面影響都不是自然而生的,它受到貿易機制的設計、個別國家的貿易政策、企業的商業策略及消費者的選擇等因素所制約。


 


事實清楚表明,並不是所有自由貿易均能帶來經濟增長,又不是所有經濟增長都能導向可持續發展。事實上,在貿易自由化的進程中,對貿易政策及以貿易帶動增長的負面影響視而不見,是可持續發展的大敵 – 往往使弱勢社群及生態環境成為了犧牲品。地球上每一個人平均需要2.3公頃 的土地來製造每年需耗用的資源及棄置產出的廢物。這總需求其實己經超出可持續基數百份之四十。如果不經調節的自由貿易不斷擴展,世界其他地方都像發達國家般消費,那麼我們便需要多4個地球才能應付。


 


現行世界貿易組織所採用的貿易機制己被清楚證明不能帶來可持續發展。現時國際貿易帶來的大部分利益都分配不均,讓發達國家及新興工業經濟體系不公平地予取予携。富國每年動用三千五百億美元補貼農業,不單阻碍窮國的農民利用其勞動力增加收入,亦更使貧困情況惡化。因為現行貿易體制的設計中缺乏考慮生態環境的可持續性,使現今動植物的滅絕率因為人類活動而比正常情況高出1,000倍,這將只會禍延我們自己及下一代。


 


但貿易自由化是可以被改造成有利可持續發展的工具的。世貿最近一輪的談判,即「多哈回合」被國際社會公認為「發展回合」,因它特別集中在發展中國家的發展需要上。香港的第六屆部長級會議實在帶來一個改變局勢,有利可持續發展的難得機會。會議的成果將會影響數以億計地球人的生活。全球在香港下了極大的注碼。


 


我們在下星期正要面對這樣的一个道德危機:若果世貿談判在富國大國的压力下達成協議,發展中國家的滅貧目標將難以實現、環境質素惡化的風險將大增。但若果世貿談判失敗,現行不公平的貿易規則將延續下去,得益的只是欧美大国。更有甚者,若果多邊談判的機制瓦解,国與國之間的貿易以雙邊談判取而代之,弱勢小國          將陷於孤立無援的劣勢。


 


能否以公民社會的道德壓力,促使自由貿易返回促進可持續發展的正軌? 這戲碼即將在香港會展中心上演驚心動魄的一幕。


 


黎廣德


香港可持續發展公民議會主席


 


2005年12月1日 星期四

WTO: Why should Hong Kong care?

To a casual observer reading only news dispatches from the government, one would wonder why Hong Kong is lifting stones only to drop at his own feet by inviting the World Trade Organisation to meet here in December.


 


1.                              Hong Kong will be hosting the Sixth Ministerial Conference (MC6) of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in December 2005. Substantial resources, to the tune of over HK$200 million, will be devoted by the Hong Kong people to this event. At the same time, enormous expectations are placed on the outcome of the event by countries and peoples all over the world.


 


2.                              It is both the right and responsibility for Hong Kong’s civil society to articulate its views on MC6, and to make the Hong Kong public aware of the potential impact of MC6. It is not enough for Hong Kong to be only a good host to provide the venue and the hospitality, but it is essential for Hong Kong – government, business and civil society alike – to be a responsible host who is prepared to use every means within its control to achieve the most important goal of MC6: make trade work for sustainable development.


 


3.                              The stated aim of WTO is the promotion of trade liberalization. For countries around the world, especially for developing countries, trade liberalization can be a powerful tool for economic growth – a necessary condition for poverty alleviation and for enhancing quality of life. Under certain conditions, trade liberalization can have a positive impact on labour and environmental conditions through a more efficient allocation of resources and increases in productivity, leading to social development and higher wages. It can also contribute towards higher economic growth and inward investment, and create resources which can be used for environmental protection and poverty alleviation. However, none of these impacts are automatic; they depend on the design of the trade regime, the trade policies of individual states, the behaviour of the corporate sector and the choices of consumers.


 


4.                              In the Marrakech Agreement that leads to the establishment of the WTO, it is given a mandate firmly grounded on the principles of sustainable development. In no unambiguous terms, WTO’s mandate is “to raise the living standards, create employment for all and a high and growing income level in real terms, generate effective demand, growth of production, trade and services, while protecting and conserving the environment and to reinforcing the means so to do in a way that is compatible with the parties’ respective needs and concerns at the different levels of economic development’.


'


5.                              Yet not all trade liberalization will lead to economic growth and not all economic growth will lead to sustainable development. Indeed, in the pursuit of trade liberalization, the disregard of the harmful effects of trade policies and trade-generated growth often works against sustainable development – worsening the plight of the poor and the disadvantaged, as well as damaging the environment and the eco-system. The average world citizen requires 2.3 global hectares to produce what he consumes every year and then to have a place to dump what’s left over. That is 40% more than is sustainable. If, through the spread of unmitigated trade liberalization, the rest of the world were to consume like the developed world, we would need the equivalent of 4 extra Earths.


 


6.                              The current trade regime adopted by the WTO has clearly failed to deliver sustainable development. The benefits of current international trade are unevenly distributed with large gains for rich countries and newly industrialized economies. Rich countries spend US$350 billion per annum on agricultural subsidy which not only prevents farmers in poor countries to increase their incomes through their own labor, but also often aggravates their poverty . Because of the noted absence of environmental sustainability in the design of the current trade regime, the current rate of extinction of plant and animal species, already 1000 times more than the background rate because of human activities, will only accelerate to the detriment of this and future generations.


 


7.                              Trade liberalization can however be re-shaped into a tool for sustainable development. The current phase of negotiation in the WTO, the Doha Round, is recognized by the international community as a “development round” with special focus on the developmental needs of developing countries. The MC 6 in Hong Kong thus presents a unique opportunity to turn the tide in favour of sustainable development. The outcome of MC6 – whether successful or not, will affect the lives of billions of people. The stakes are high in Hong Kong .


 


8.                              In its capacity as the host for MC6, the Hong Kong government has a duty not only to ensure the smooth running of the conference, but also use everything within its sphere of influence to encourage and persuade WTO members to make trade work for sustainable development. The fulfillment of the promises of this development round, including the installment of a fair trade regime and the promotion of responsible trade practices, is the single largest contribution that Hong Kong can make in the WTO negotiations, potentially for the benefit of billions of people who at present are either unable to enjoy the benefits of trade liberalization, or are suffering from its harmful effects.


 


9.                              For the business sector in Hong Kong , MC6 presents a valuable opportunity to review, rethink and re-adjust its trade practices in the context of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility. Hong Kong’s private sector, especially those in key positions of  global supply chains, should embrace the concept and the practice of responsible trade – trade practices that support international human rights, uphold dignified labour conditions, respect local culture, promote environmental responsibilities, and manage natural resources in a sustainable manner.  The leaders of the Hong Kong business community should take this chance to affirm their commitment to responsible trade.


 


10.                          Hong Kong’s civil society can play an important role by raising public awareness on the role of WTO, the inadequacies of the current trade regime, the significance of the development round, and the possibilities that may open up in MC6. Not only is it important for civil society organizations to position themselves as a constructive force in respect of the official outcome of MC6,  but it is of equal importance to promote in the local community the practice of sustainable consumption that supports responsible trade practices and a fair trade regime.


 


11.                          We call on all stakeholders alike – government, business and NGOs – to seize the opportunity of MC6 to make trade work for sustainable development. This is a rare chance for Hong Kong to live up to its claim of Asia’s world city, and for the Hong Kong public to stand up proud as global citizens.


 


世貿透視:公義、偽善、真相、假象

世貿第六次部長级會議結束。塵埃落定後,在香港人的腦海中只會交織着以下的印象:曾蔭權元首式開幕詞的君臨天下、維園集會的多元文化嘉年華、韓國農民三步一叩首的悲情、歐美代表的冷漠高傲、非政府組織聲嘶力竭的控訴、灣仔淪陷的驚心動魄、曾俊華宣佈大功告成的躊躇滿志………。


一週過去、一切依舊、紅隧如常擠塞,這就是香港人的世貿?


事實上、在一大堆陌生名詞的背后 - 「公平貿易」、「出口補貼」、「市場准入」、「綠箱」、「黄箱」、「國內援助」、「瑞士方程式」- 是無數活生生的農民、工人、消費者、企業經營者,賴以維持生計及改善生活質素的遊戲規則。諷刺的是、制定這些影响我們每一個人的遊戲規則的世貿,卻是以一種高度技術性、高度程序化的方式運作,一般人難以明白它的運作,成為一個充滿着公義與偽善的對跱、真相與假象難分的龐然巨物。


 


2005年10月1日 星期六

Turning the Tide: Make Trade Work for Sustainable Development

1.          Hong Kong will be hosting the Sixth Ministerial Conference (MC6) of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in December 2005. Substantial resources, to the tune of over HK$200 million, will be devoted by the Hong Kong people to this event. At the same time, enormous expectations are placed on the outcome of the event by countries and peoples all over the world.


 


2.          It is both the right and responsibility for Hong Kong’s civil society to articulate its views on MC6, and to make the Hong Kong public aware of the potential impact of MC6. It is not enough for Hong Kong to be only a good host to provide the venue and the hospitality, but it is essential for Hong Kong – government, business and civil society alike – to be a responsible host who is prepared to use every means within its control to achieve the most important goal of MC6: make trade work for sustainable development.


 


3.          The stated aim of WTO is the promotion of trade liberalization. For countries around the world, especially for developing countries, trade liberalization can be a powerful tool for economic growth – a necessary condition for poverty alleviation and for enhancing quality of life. Under certain conditions, trade liberalization can have a positive impact on labour and environmental conditions through a more efficient allocation of resources and increases in productivity, leading to social development and higher wages. It can also contribute towards higher economic growth and inward investment, and create resources which can be used for environmental protection and poverty alleviation. However, none of these impacts are automatic; they depend on the design of the trade regime, the trade policies of individual states, the behaviour of the corporate sector and the choices of consumers.


 


4.          In the Marrakech Agreement that leads to the establishment of the WTO, it is given a mandate firmly grounded on the principles of sustainable development. In no unambiguous terms, WTO’s mandate is “to raise the living standards, create employment for all and a high and growing income level in real terms, generate effective demand, growth of production, trade and services, while protecting and conserving the environment and to reinforcing the means so to do in a way that is compatible with the parties’ respective needs and concerns at the different levels of economic development’.


5.          '


6.          Yet not all trade liberalization will lead to economic growth and not all economic growth will lead to sustainable development. Indeed, in the pursuit of trade liberalization, the disregard of the harmful effects of trade policies and trade-generated growth often works against sustainable development – worsening the plight of the poor and the disadvantaged, as well as damaging the environment and the eco-system. The average world citizen requires 2.3 global hectares to produce what he consumes every year and then to have a place to dump what’s left over. That is 40% more than is sustainable. If, through the spread of unmitigated trade liberalization, the rest of the world were to consume like the developed world, we would need the equivalent of 4 extra Earths.


 


7.          The current trade regime adopted by the WTO has clearly failed to deliver sustainable development. The benefits of current international trade are unevenly distributed with large gains for rich countries and newly industrialized economies. Rich countries spend US$350 billion per annum on agricultural subsidy which not only prevents farmers in poor countries to increase their incomes through their own labor, but also often aggravates their poverty . Because of the noted absence of environmental sustainability in the design of the current trade regime, the current rate of extinction of plant and animal species, already 1000 times more than the background rate because of human activities, will only accelerate to the detriment of this and future generations.


 


8.          Trade liberalization can however be re-shaped into a tool for sustainable development. The current phase of negotiation in the WTO, the Doha Round, is recognized by the international community as a “development round” with special focus on the developmental needs of developing countries. The MC 6 in Hong Kong thus presents a unique opportunity to turn the tide in favour of sustainable development. The outcome of MC6 – whether successful or not, will affect the lives of billions of people. The stakes are high in Hong Kong .


 


9.          In its capacity as the host for MC6, the Hong Kong government has a duty not only to ensure the smooth running of the conference, but also use everything within its sphere of influence to encourage and persuade WTO members to make trade work for sustainable development. The fulfillment of the promises of this development round, including the installment of a fair trade regime and the promotion of responsible trade practices, is the single largest contribution that Hong Kong can make in the WTO negotiations, potentially for the benefit of billions of people who at present are either unable to enjoy the benefits of trade liberalization, or are suffering from its harmful effects.


 


10.      For the business sector in Hong Kong , MC6 presents a valuable opportunity to review, rethink and re-adjust its trade practices in the context of sustainable development and corporate social responsibility. Hong Kong’s private sector, especially those in key positions of  global supply chains, should embrace the concept and the practice of responsible trade – trade practices that support international human rights, uphold dignified labour conditions, respect local culture, promote environmental responsibilities, and manage natural resources in a sustainable manner.  The leaders of the Hong Kong business community should take this chance to affirm their commitment to responsible trade.


 


11.      Hong Kong’s civil society can play an important role by raising public awareness on the role of WTO, the inadequacies of the current trade regime, the significance of the development round, and the possibilities that may open up in MC6. Not only is it important for civil society organizations to position themselves as a constructive force in respect of the official outcome of MC6,  but it is of equal importance to promote in the local community the practice of sustainable consumption that supports responsible trade practices and a fair trade regime.


 


12.      We call on all stakeholders alike – government, business and NGOs – to seize the opportunity of MC6 to make trade work for sustainable development. This is a rare chance for Hong Kong to live up to its claim of Asia’s world city, and for the Hong Kong public to stand up proud as global citizens.


 


 


扭轉乾坤: 以貿易推動可持續發展

1.                              香港將於本年十二月主辦世界貿易組織第六屆部長級會議。香港為此需投放的資源預計多達港幣二億元。同時,全球各地都密切關注及期待此會議所帶來的成果。


 


2.                              香港公民社會有權利也有義務表達其對是次會議的意見及令香港普羅市民得悉會議的潛在影響。香港作為主辦單位不單只是提供場地及接待,更重要的是使香港各界包括政府、商界及公民社會等各方面均能在充足準備下盡力達成第六屆部長級會議最重要的目的 ─ 使貿易促進可持續發展。


 


3.                              世界貿易組織主張促進自由貿易。對世界上很多國家,尤其是發展中國家而言,貿易自由化或許可有效地使經濟增長,最終使貧窮問題及生活水平得以改善。在特定條件下,貿易自由化能對勞工及環境帶來一些正面影響: 如通過提高資源利用效益及生產力的改善,帶動社會發展及工資增長。它亦可刺激經濟增長及內部投資,創造更多資源投入在環境保護及消減貧窮。可是這些正面影響都不是自然而生的,它受到貿易機制的設計、個別國家的貿易政策、企業的商業策略及消費者的選擇等因素所制約。


 


4.                             促成世界貿易組織成立的馬拉喀什協議確立了可持續發展原則的定位。 它清楚表明,世界貿易組織的目的是「提高生活質素、創造全民就業、增加實際收入、刺激多元需求,促進製造、貿易及服務業的增長,同時又保護環境及加強那些在不同程度的經濟發展下,能合乎各方不同切身需要及期望的措施」


 


5.                             可是並不是所有自由貿易均能帶來經濟增長,又不是所有經濟增長都能導向可持續發展。事實上,在貿易自由化的進程中,對貿易政策及以貿易帶動增長的負面影響視而不見,是可持續發展的大敵 – 往往使弱勢社群及生態環境成為了犧牲品。地球上每一個人平均需要2.3公頃的土地來製造每年需耗用的資源及棄置產出的廢物。這總需求其實己經超出可持續基數百份之四十。如果不經調節的自由貿易不斷擴展,世界其他地方都像發達國家般消費,那麼我們便需要多4個地球才能應付。


 


6.                              現行世界貿易組織所採用的貿易機制己被清楚證明不能帶來可持續發展。現時國際貿易帶來的大部分利益都分配不均,讓發達國家及新興工業經濟體系不公平地予取予携。富國每年動用三千五百億美元補貼農業,不單阻碍窮國的農民利用其勞動力增加收入,亦更使貧困情況惡化。因為現行貿易體制的設計中缺乏考慮生態環境的可持續性,使現今動植物的滅絕率因為人類活動而比正常情況高出1,000倍,這將只會禍延我們自己及下一代。


 


7.                              但貿易自由化是可以被改造成有利可持續發展的工具。世貿最近一輪的談判,即「多哈回合」被國際社會公認為「發展回合」,因它特別集中在發展中國家的發展需要上。香港的第六屆部長級會議實在帶來一個改變局勢,有利可持續發展的難得機會。會議的成果將會影響數以億計地球人的生活。全球在香港下了極大的注碼。


8.                             香港作為主辦單位,特區政府不單有責任確保是會議能順利進行,亦需要竭盡全力鼓勵及遊說世貿成員國令貿易促進可持續發展。若這一發展回合的協議,包括建立一個公平貿易機制及推廣負責任的貿易措施得以落實,將會是香港在世貿談判中所能取得的最大單一成就,更可望令數以億計現時不能受惠於自由貿易或甚至正受其煎熬的人得償一些益處。


 


9.                              商界方面,第六屆部長級會議亦正好提供了一個在可持續發展及企業社會責任前提下反思及重整商業貿易活動的黃金機會。香港的私人企業,尤其是那些在全球供應鏈舉足輕重的商賈,應擁護問責貿易的理念及加以實踐,以支援國際人權,維護勞工權益,尊重本地文他,推廣環境責任及可持續運用自然資源。香港商界領袖應藉此機會作出對問責貿易的承諾。


 


10.                         香港的公民社會在提升普羅市民關注世界貿易組織之功能上扮演一個很重要的角色,例如有關現行貿易機制的漏洞,發展回合的重要性及在是次部長級會議上所可能帶來的機遇。公民組織的定位除了是作為推動及監察會議的建設性力量,同樣重要的是在民間推廣可持續消費,因這是問責貿易及公平貿易制度的基石。


 


11.                          我們促請所有相關持份者,無論是政府、商界及非政府組織都抓緊第六屆部長級會議這個契機促使貿易成為推動可持續發展的主力。香港宣稱是亞洲國際城市,這正是難得的契機讓香港發揮應有表現及讓香港市民成為無愧的地球公民。


 


 


2005年6月1日 星期三

長春社 2004-05年 主席致辭

對長春社來說,去年可以稱得上是環保界的“多事之秋”。


回顧過去十二個月,香港出現了一浪接一浪與環保有關的事件,考驗長春社為達成使命而迎戰的能耐:從湾仔海旁填海問題,到啓德機場舊址規劃檢討;從喜靈洲超級監獄到大嶼山發展概念計劃;從香港空氣污染日趨嚴重到海港淨化計劃;從紅湾半島事件到固體廢物處理策略;從合和超级酒店建議到油街官地發展藍圖;從保存景賢里到保護中央警署;從赤柱盆景園砍樹醜聞到林村許願樹受破害;從生態敏感地點的管理協議到鄉郊保育的公私合營計劃等等…多不勝數。


在上述事例中,長春社每每扮演牽頭或積極回應的角色,倡議和推動環保和可持續發展原則。除此以外,長春社更繼續忙於推行一贯的環保教育工作及其它相關的項目。


那麼我們努力工作換來的成效有多大呢?我可以告訴大家:答案是成敗不一。


比較顯而易見的成效是香港社會人士――甚或商界――的環保意識普遍提高,但更值得大家欣喜的現象卻是本港公民團體的合作和結盟,擴大了公民參與。我們今天所凝聚的社會資本,他日可能轉化為一股影響深遠的社會力量。


然而,我們在影響政府公共政策方面,卻遇上兩大阻力。其一是特區政府的内部決策過程紊亂無章,導致政府宣示的“可持續發展願景”變得支離破碎。其二是在“華盛頓共識” 的全球化意識形態影響下,政府及商界不自覺地接受了偏袒大企業和“但求發展,不論代價”的心態。


今年七月,香港將出現新的特首。這本來是個揚棄舊有軟弱制度的寶貴機會。然而能否把握這個良機卻視乎新領導層能否堅持和堅守可持續發展的理念,這是第一度藩障。特區政府所欠缺的不是對正確路向的認識,而是打破層層既得利益枷鎖的政治勇氣。


至於第二度藩障,則來自今日社會上的意識形態,很多人擔心香港欠缺領導改革的有識之士。到底香港人會否終有一天採納一套開明的全球化理念――承認全球化會對不同社群帶來或正或負的影響,認識市場力量的局限,維護脆弱的生態系統,以及支持最重要的一環――推動社會公義?要是我們的管治模式欠缺波濤壯闊的改革,可持續發展將仍然停留在海市蜃樓的階段。


本人充任長春社主席四年以來,一再受到一眾理事、員工及公民團體盟友的熱誠和幹勁所深深感動,故亦借此向他們致以由衷的感謝。他們的堅持讓我們看到希望的曙光。在微小的程度上,也許長春社本身的歷史可以作出見証。本社成立於1968,當時它不外是主張環保的一點孤獨聲音。然而在漫長的十七年後,香港政府終於設立了正規的環保部門。時至今日,一切已經變得那麼理所當然,沒有人能想像一個没有環保署的特區政府。


只要公民社會時刻保持警醒,難保今天被視為“不可能的夢想”,會被我們的後代視為“不可迴避的事實”!


黎廣德


20056月1日


 


 


The Conservancy Association Annual report 2004-2005 Message from the Chairman

It has been an eventful year for the Conservancy Association.


Over the past twelve months we witnessed many issues that pose formidable challenges to our mission: from harbour reclamation to Wanchai and Kai Tak planning review, from Hei Leng Chau Super-prison to Lantau Concept Plan, from worsening air pollution to Harbour Area Treatment Scheme, from Hunghom Pennisula to solid waste management strategy, from Hopewell Mega Tower to Oil Street Depot site, from King Yin Lei Mansion to Central Police Station Heritage Complex, from tree-felling at Stanley Bonsai Garden to Taipo Wishing Tree saga, from management agreements for ecologically sensitive sites to public private partnership for rural conservation. The list goes on.


In all of this CA has played either a leading or proactive role to protect the environment and advocate for sustainable development. On top of this CA continues with its busy programme in environmental education and other project work.


Yet have we achieved much? Despite our best efforts the results have been mixed.


It is easy to observe a rising level of environmental awareness in the community, and to a lesser extent, in the corporate sector. More importantly, by forging alliance among civil society groups and broadening public participation, we are building up social capital that may have long lasting impact.


However, our success in fostering public policy changes are hampered by two factors: 1)  the disarray in the government’s internal policy-making process which leads to a breakdown in its pursuit for the proclaimed vision of sustainable development; 2) the pro-big-business ideology dominated by the Washington Consensus of globalisation which engenders a “development-at-all-cost” mentality in government and in the business sector.


A new Chief Executive for the SAR Government in July offers a precious opportunity to tackle the first hurdle of institutional weakness. Yet whether this opportunity will be seized upon depends very much on the new leadership’s commitment to sustainable development. There is no lack of knowledge on what is the right path to follow, but a lack of political will to break the shackle of entrenched interests.


As for the second hurdle of ideology, many are pessimistic about the lack of intellectual leadership for change. Will we Hongkongers ever adopt a new ideology of enlightened globalisation that is capable to acknowledge its differential impact on communities, recognise the limitation of market approaches, respond to the fragility of the eco-system, and, above all, promote social justice? Without this sea-change in governing philosophy, sustainable development remains an unreachable mirage.


Over the past four years of my chairmanship in CA I was touched time and again by the enthusiasm and resourcefulness of our directors, staff and civil society partners, to whom I am fully indebted. Their perseverance offers a gleam of hope. To a small extent CA’s history has born this out: by standing up as a lone voice for conservation in 1968, an environmental protection department found its way into the government hierarchy 17 years later. It all seems so natural today that nobody can now image an SAR government without the EPD.


Provided the civil society keeps up its vigilance, what seems impossible today could one day be seen as inevitable by future generations.


Albert Lai


1 June 2005


 


 


2005年5月1日 星期日

“People, Planet and Prosperity”

“People, Planet and Prosperity” – these are the catchwords with which Mr Donald Tsang should be familiar during his two-year chairmanship of the Council for Sustainable Development and prior to his elevation to the current post of Chief Executive.


Yet when Mr Tsang announced his intention to revive the plan for a new government headquarters at Admiralty during his election campaign last June, he could not have foreseen how much embarrassment his decision would inflict upon his transport officials in an expert forum two weeks ago. When asked to defend whether the proposed Central-Wanchai Bypass is a sustainable transport solution, government officials had no choice but to reveal traffic models which surprisingly predicted that, even with the bypass, traffic jams would be widespread again by 2016 – with the traffic generated by the proposed government headquarters a major contributing factor.


Mr Tsang should not be expected to grasp the intricacies of traffic models. Yet he would be well-advised to learn one simple lesson – a “business-as-usual” mentality will not lead us down the path of sustainable development.


In the above example, finding a sustainable solution that satisfies the “People” dimension of accruing benefits equitably between car-owners and public transport users, and the “Planet” dimension of reducing vehicle emissions, clearly demands more than the “Prosperity” consideration of maintaining smooth traffic. In fact, a certain level of development shift out of Hong Kong Island north seems inevitable if the majority preference to lower development density in return for better quality of life, as evidenced in last year’s public survey by the Council for Sustainable Development, is to be taken seriously.


In his first policy address, Mr Tsang may be tempted to announce how a strong and bold government can speed up a range of mega-projects. Unfortunately, many of these projects, despite vague assertions of their ‘strategic benefits’ by political heavyweights, may not have gone through rigorous sustainability impact assessments. The risk of a white elephant jungle is very real indeed.


A litmus test for the policy address is whether Hong Kong people’s call for a shift from “growth at all costs” to “quality growth only” will be answered – growth that nurtures a healthy, economically vibrant and just society that respects the natural environment and values its cultural heritage.


Albert Lai


Chairman, Hong Kong People’s Council for Sustainable Development


May 2005


 


 


2005年4月23日 星期六

《香港家書》世界地球日

 


2005-4-23


秀慧:


自從你今年初經過香港返回澳洲後,相信你唸的碩士課程己經開學近兩個月了。其實我很羨慕你們這一代有機會在大學畢業後到處闖盪,你甚至隻到過拉丁美洲亞馬遜森林,相信對於唸環境科學的你必定有相當啓發。


你一定知道昨天( 四月二十二日)是世界地球日。昨天不少香港環保團体均有舉辦紀念活動,但今年我的心情並不興奮,因為聯合國在上月剛剛公佈了一份由全球1300個科學家撰寫的「千年生態系統評估」報告,表示原先制定的「千禧年發展目標」──即到2015年要將全球貧窮人口減半的目標── 將難以實現。事實上、報告指出目前不僅有11億人口每日收入少於一美元,而其中7億多人直接倚賴生態系統的供給來維持生計。過去數十年的人類活動已經毁滅了全球四份之一的珊瑚礁及百份之35的紅樹林,物種滅絕的速度比天然速度加快了1000倍。全球目前有11億人缺乏飲用水,26億人缺乏基本衛生設施。


簡單來說:地球已經病了,而人類正在開始承受地球生病的惡果。


或許你會覺得這些數字太空泛、太遙遠了。但其實在香港, 生態系統承受的壓力亦隨處可見:維港早已不適合舉辦渡海泳、空氣污染使我們由於額外死亡及疾病付出的代價每年超出56億元、在未來25年我們要多找相等於24個維園大小的土地作為垃圾堆填區。


地球日是用以提醒我們對地球的關愛。秀慧:若果你媽媽冷病了,你一定毫不豫疑地把你的外套讓給她。但地球母親病了,我們又願意做多少呢?


我們有多少人願意到超市購物不用膠袋?願意將室內空調機的温度調高三度?願意在過年時拒絕吃髮菜?願意在報名参加旅行團時指定不吃野味?願意在街角見到承包商圍板砍樹前,走上前問他有沒有許可証?


要醫好地球的病,身體力行固然重要。但我不想誤導你,以為改變自已的生活方式就已經是一切的答案。企業和政府的體制設計,已經反映了人類的貪婪和短視。如果我們不能夠促使商界改變他們做生意的方式,說服政府改變他們管治的模式,地球的病就沒有治好的一天。


你曾經很想了解我在長春社的義務工作。我在過去一週分別與電力公司商談如何减低發電廠的污染排放,與發展商召開工作坊研究如何草擬「保護樹木條例」,向一個商界聯盟解釋公民社會對於推動維港可持續發展的立場,與政府開會討論「港珠澳大橋」對大嶼山環境的影響,並在長春社召開理事會,決定成立一個文化古蹟資源中心。顯而易見,若果我們不能夠促使企業與政府明白地球病情的嚴重性,促成公民社會、政府與商界的合作,達致可持續發展的機會便十分渺茫。


但是,要促成這種三方的合作是十分艱巨的任務。成敗的關鍵在於有多少人願意將他們對地球的關愛以行動參與的方式表達出來。只有廣泛的公民参與才能夠彰顯社會的價值取向,才能夠彌補公民社會資源不足的弱點,與政府及企業平等對話,設定市民關心的議題。


去年發生了一件令我十分興奮的大事,就是諾貝爾和平獎首次頒發給一位環保鬥士── 非洲肯尼亞的 馬塔伊 女士。相信你也知道,馬塔伊在飽受壓迫的情况下創立了非洲最大的環保組織,在過去三十年動員貧窮婦女種植了三千萬棵樹,促進生態多樣化,為居民創造就業機會,並提高女性地位。馬塔伊本身是生物學家,但她曾因為反對貪污及救助窮人而坐牢。諾貝爾獎委員會表揚她結合了科学、社會承担及政治動員,成為身體力行、實踐可持續發展理念的典範。


馬塔伊的事蹟解答了一個經常有人向我提出的問題:為甚麽環境保護要與社會公義拉上關係?我認為正因為脆弱的地球生態系統,需要我們為子孫後代的福祉而自我節制;但在一個沒有社會公義的環境下,每一個人都只會尋求最大的眼前利益。因為誰能保證我一已的克制、一已的犧牲,能夠為子孫後代帶來回報呢?所以沒有社會公義,便無從建立一個保護環境的體制。


秀慧,你說身邊有不少朋友忙於瘦身。或許你可以說服她們,把瘦身的金錢用於捐助弱勢社羣,把瘦身的時間用於在週末植樹,在平日晚上到社區參加義務工作。她們這樣做既可為地球治病,更可達致更佳的個人瘦身效果呢!


祝你在環保科學方面的鑽研日益精進,日後可以做個醫治地球的好大夫!


 


廣德舅父


二零零五年四月廿三日