2008年2月28日 星期四

Responses to the 2008-09 Budget By The Professional Commons


Enduring Institutional Defects;


 Lack of Commitment in the Pursuit of “Sustainability”


Responses to the 2008-09 Budget By The Professional Commons


In response to the 2008-09 Budget as announced by the Financial Secretary on 27 February 2008, The Professional Commons hereby suggests the following:


1.      Pragmatic Enough, But Lack of Vision


Generally speaking, the coverage of the Budget is quite comprehensive, as it has responded to the public’s anticipation “pragmatically”. The HK$ 30 billion plus of windfall hand out to the general public has to a certain extent accomplished the principle of “returning the wealth to the people”. However, the share for the underprivileged population only amounted to around HK$10 billion. It also failed to put in place a support system that can effectively address the needs of the underprivileged under the principles of a “fair” and “caring” society. It is important that the concept of “sustainability” should not be restricted to public finance only. However, the Hong Kong SAR Government has been unenthusiastic in addressing structural matters, such as poverty, the ageing of the population, and tackling global climate change in a systematic manner. Missing the opportunities to resolve such fundamental matters in a timely manner is regretful.


2.      Lack of a Mechanism in Identifying and Providing Support to the Low-income Earners


The “Pilot Transport Support Scheme” is still restricted to the low income residents in four districts, and the relatively high income thresholds results in a small number of beneficiaries. Although the proposed “Electricity Charge Subsidies” is claimed to be a measure targeting the poor, in reality it is a subsidy for every household across the territories. The proposed injection of funds to the low income earners’ Mandatory Provident Fund accounts (hereafter the MPF) have ignored the retirement needs of those who did not have a MPF account, such as local domestic workers, hawkers as well as homemakers. It is obvious that there is no existing mechanism which would enable the Government to effectively identify the low income earners, and no existing mechanism in the Government that could direct its assistance to low-income earners as well. It is embarrassing for the Government to have to rely on the MPF accounts and the accounts in domestic electricity charges as the only channels for the provision of these special allowances. Without an effective mechanism placed in advance for assisting the poor, particularly the “working poor”, the Government would not be able to provide a helping hand even if extra financial resources are available.


3.      Lack of a Mechanism in Providing Comprehensive Support in Public Transportation


The provision of the “Pilot Transport Support Scheme” would still be confined to the residents in four districts in the New Territories — Yuen Long, Tuen Mun, North and the Islands. Such a move neglects the needs of the residents in other low income areas. Similar to the four districts covered in the Scheme, six other districts, including Kwun Tong, Wong Tai Sin, Sham Shui Po, Yau Tsim Mong, Kwai Ching and Tai Po which also have an unemployment rate higher than the overall average in Hong Kong of 4.8% (based on 2006 figures). The unemployed living in these districts are looking for additional support in the future. As the “Transport Support Scheme” is supposed to cover the unemployed as a whole, it is widely expected to extend the scheme to this vulnerable group. For these reasons, it is most clear the proposed arrangements would incur in a higher degree of unfairness.


4.      Lack of a Fully-functional “Citizen’s Account”


The measures proposed by the Financial Secretary concerning the injection of funds to low income earners’ MPF accounts has echoed the reality that every citizen would need to prepare for retirement, and they would require a retirement account to deal with the amount concerned. Should the healthcare finance scheme be officially implemented, HKD50 billion that had been be designated as start-up capital, will be allocated to every single citizen. It would result in an extra medical account to be carried by every citizen. Moreover, the recipients of the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance and the Old Age Allowance also have a specialized account to receive their allowances. As a result, every Hong Kong resident would have several separate accounts in relation with public finance and public services. It would be cumbersome and repetitive, when compared to the single “Citizen’s Account” approach we have proposed earlier.


5.      Lack of an All-rounded Mechanism on Tackling Global Climate Change


The provision of tax concessions on Euro V diesel and on environment-friendly commercial vehicles is unlikely to bring significant reduction in air pollution. Such a move is outright trivial, when compared to the increasingly severe effects caused by global climate change, which requires an immediate implementation of relief measures. Not only has the respective budgetary measures failed to formulate a more macro paradigm in the arena of environmental protection and sustainable development, it indirectly exacerbates the worsening of the climate, due to the provision of subsidies on electricity charges, as it would encourage the excessive use of electricity, and the creation of further carbon dioxide emissions.


The Hong Kong SAR Government should be more forward-looking in formulating measures on tackling global climate change. It should promote environmental protection and energy saving measures in a multi-angle and a multi-dimensional manner, through the application of the internationally recognized “low carbon development mode”, and the establishment of a “Climate Challenge Fund”.


6.      Concluding Remarks


Having adopted a stopgap approach, the Financial Secretary did not provide concrete measures to tackle long-term issues that have been haunting the general public. It is then inevitable that the Government is putting itself in a state of straitened circumstances.


In order to formulate a thorough and forward-looking set of proposals in tackling those issues, and to add light to the creation of a harmonious environment for Hong Kong, the Government should accord great importance to these issues, and to tackle them through institutional building, after going through a thorough consideration and analysis.


Note: Please go to the following websites to download the Fairness, Forward looking and Development Research Report on the Better Use of Fiscal Surplus of the Professional Commons published in January 2008.


www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Report%20Chi.pdf (Chinese Version)

www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Ex%20Sum%20Chi.pdf (Executive Summary of the Chinese Version)


www.procommons.org.hk/documents/20080204_report_eng_final.pdf (English Version)


2008年2月27日 星期三

延續制度缺憾 虛應「持續」要求: 對二00八至0九財政年度政府財政預算案的回應



 


延續制度缺憾 虛應「持續」要求


公共專業聯盟對二00八至0九財政年度政府財政預算案的回應


 


就財政司司長在2008227日所發表的二00八至0九財政年度政府財政預算案,本智庫的回應如下:


 


 


1.   務實有餘 前瞻不足


 


整份預算案的涵蓋面比較全面,因應社會的訴求「務實地」作出了回應,回饋全體市民的款項達三百多億元,體現了「還富於民」原則;問題是弱勢社群的受惠金額衹有百餘億,又未能充份體現仁愛公平原則給予基層人士系统性的支援。此外,可持續性這理念不應狹隘地應用於公共理財方面,而忽略了社會發展的可持續性和環境需要的可持續性。特區政府未能從制度層面處理貧窮、老齢化等結構性問題,及積極應對環境質素惡化和全球氣候變化問題,對於特區政府錯失時機,我們感到惋惜!


 


2.   缺乏識別低收入人士及援助機制


 


有限度放寬交通費支援試驗計劃衹惠及四區低收入市民,而且收入水平限制偏低,致使受惠人數不多;電費補貼雖云是扶助低收入人士的措施,實際上是惠及全港住戶的,沒有針對性;注資低收入人士的強積金戶口卻忽畧了未納入強積金計劃範圍的本地家務助理、小販等工作人口,也沒有照顧家庭主婦的老齡生活需要。凡此種種,均反映特區政府缺乏一套有效識別低收入人士的機制。借用強積金戶口及住戶電費戶口發放對低收入人士的援助金,則顯示政府缺乏旨在照顧低收入人士,特別是在職貧窮人士,的援助機制,以致有額外財政資源時也難以有效施予援手。


 


3.   缺乏全面的交通費支援機制


 


交通費支援試驗計劃的適用範圍仍局限於新界的元朗、屯門、北區和離島,未能顧及其他地區低收入居民的需要。2006年,觀塘、黃大仙、深水埗、油尖旺、葵青和大埔六個區跟前述四個受惠地區一樣,區內失業率同樣高於全港的平均水平(4.8%),這些失業人士其實同樣需要額外支援:該交通費支援計劃理應覆蓋全港失業人士,得到多一點幫助。所以,有關安排存在嚴重的不公平問題。


 


4.   缺乏整全的「市民戶口」


 


財政司司長注資低收入人士強積金戶口的措施,充份反映每個市民客觀上都需要退休安排,及需要一個退休戶口處理有關款項。若醫療改革計劃正式落實,財政預算案撥出的500億啟動基金將注入個人戶口,屆時每個市民便會多了一個醫療戶口。再者,領取綜援及生果金人士則有申領有關款項的專用戶口。結果,每個香港市民可能擁有多個與公共財政及公共服務有關的戶口,跟我們月前建議的多用途的「市民戶口」比較,顯得架牀疊屋。


 


5.   缺乏全盤的應對氣候變化機制


 


為較環保的柴油提供優惠稅率及為環保商用車輛提供首次登記稅優惠祗能輕微減少空氣污染,相對於全球氣候變化問題的迫切性及嚴重性,可說是杯水車薪。財政預算案未能在環保可持續發展範疇展現較宏觀的理念,反而提供電費補貼,間接鼓勵電力消耗,製造更多二氧化碳,使氣候更加惡化。特區政府應更具前瞻性,考慮採納國際社會上十分推崇的「低碳發展模式」,設立「應對氣候變化基金」,從多角度多層面推動環保及節能措施。


 


6.   結語


 


財政司司長迴避一些長期困擾港人的重大問題,採取「頭痛醫頭,腳痛醫腳」的對策,難免左支右絀。祗有正視問題,經通盤考慮後,透過建立制度予以落實,才能徹底解決問題,為社會增添和諧氣氛。


 


 


 2008228


註:公共專業聯盟在20081月發表的「公平、前瞻、發展-就善用政府財政盈餘的研究報告」,可於以下網頁下載:

www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Report%20Chi.pdf (中文版)


www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Ex%20Sum%20Chi.pdf (中文摘要)


www.procommons.org.hk/documents/20080204_report_eng_final.pdf (英文版)



2008年2月26日 星期二

「政壇新秀」打破迷思



上週六應香港電台邀請出席了「政壇新秀訓練班」節目,與一班熱心的年青人一起討論財政預算案。節目主持人是張寶華和程振鵬,同時有十多位政壇新秀參加,熱鬧非常。整整一個小時的討論不但見證了年青人的活力,他們關心的議題從人口老化,貧富不公,環境污染以至財政紀律等無所不包,打破了一般人認為時下年青人不關心政治的迷思。如有興趣聆聽節目內容,可登入:www.rthk.org.hk/rthk/radio2/YoungPolitican/20080223.html


(《第189集》嘉賓:立法會議員張超雄、公共專業聯盟主席黎廣德)


「香港可持續發展公民議會」一浪接一浪


香港可持續發展公民議會在上週六召開了第五次週年大會 。我從公民議會在2003年成立至今己經擔任了四屆主席,與眾多致力推動可持續發展的朋友一 起開拓耕耘了四個寒暑。到今天,「可持續發展」對香港人來說己經不 是一個陌生的名詞。我決定不再提名競選主席一職,但仍然會以公民議 會委員的身份參加工作。當然,我在「公共專業聯盟 」主持公共政策研究,以及在公民黨、長春社和社聯等機構擔任的公職 ,也離不開可持續發展的議題。 


交棒便意味著新人接棒。我很高興在會上選出了葉廣濤為主席 ,莊陳有和周錦超為副主席。相信公民議會經過四年起步 ,馬上便進入茁壯成長的階段。以下是我在週年大會上發表的主席報告 :

I. Report from the Chairman


Ever since the foundation of PCSD four years ago, the concept of sustainable development has now become a household term. Despite the not uncommon misuse of the term, it is a testimony of how far society has moved.


 


Over the past year perhaps the most important programme for PCSD is the organistion of the Hong Kong NGO Delegation to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali in December 2007. As the only accredited NGO going to Bali from Hong Kong, we made an extra effort to nurture young leaders for this global challenge by collaborating with Hong Kong University and taking on 13 student members in the delegation.


 


Yet the mission to deal with the climate change challenge only just began upon the return of the delegates to Hong Kong . The government, having sent only two delegates there to join the China delegation in the last few days of the conference, seemed to have little urge to fast-track Hong Kong ’s response to this global challenge. This reminded me of the situation in 2002 when there was a big contrast between the 37-member HK NGO delegation and the 12-member government delegation. The contrast was not so much in size as in the enthusiasm and eagerness to act. The disappointment on Government’s inaction at that time was one of the main factors leading to the birth of PCSD.


 


Despite our very limited resource, we are pleased to have witnessed the success of the school radio drama competition focussing on the theme of air quality. The positive response from over 40 schools was very encouraging. This highlighted both the concern on air quality by our younger generation as well as the power of innovative programming.


 


In the past year PCSD continued its effort in advocacy and awareness building over a wide spectrum of issues, ranging from local agenda 21, sustainability reporting, harbourfront planning, cultural district development, population policy, to public education. Our network with many professional bodies, universities and community groups ensured a high level of dynamism which helped generate new ideas and new initiatives. The introduction of the concept of responsible competitiveness to local business leaders is a good example.


 


As the founding chairman of PCSD in its first four years, I am truly thankful to the unwavering support of all our councillors and members. Hong Kong is an unforgiving place for professionals and academics in terms of constraints on time and resources. Yet the generous contribution by many members is the key to make PCSD an uniquely successful, albeit small, organisation.


 


 


Albert Lai


 


II. Activities Report


Some of the highlights of activities during the year are listed below:


 


      1.   Luncheon Talk on Responsible Competitivenss


 


PCSD, with the support of the Trade Development Council, organised a luncheon talk in Januray 2007 featuring Dr Simon Zadek, an international guru on responsible competitivenss. Over 100 business and civil society leaders attended the luncheon and the lecture by Dr Zadek was very well-received.


 


2.                 Clean Air Radio Drama Competition


 


Over 40 schools participated in the first Clean Air Radio Drama Competition organised between September to December 2007. The winners were selected by a distinguished panel and awards were given to the school teams at the Air Summit organised by the Council for Sustainable Development. The award scripts were aired at Metro Radio in a show hosted by our Vice-Chairman, Plato Yip.


 


3.                 Better Air Quality


 


PCSD served as a public engagement partner with the Council for Sustainable Development on the subject of Better Air Quality. A Public Forum was held in October 2007 featuring a presentation by Professor Anthony Hedley of the Hong Kong University . The feedback from the forum was passed on to CSD which then formed part of the public views included in the final report. Two councillors, Dr WK Chan and Mr Chua Hoi Wai, were members of the Support Group responsible for the strategy formulation.


 


4.                 Population Policy


 


PCSD was an engagement partner with CSD in the formulation of sustainable development strategy for population policy. Following the two forums held by PCSD in 2006 as part of the public engagement exercise, our councillors, Mr Chua Hoi Wai, Dr WK Chan and Ir Albert Lai were involved in the final vetting of the Strategy report on population policy through their membership  in the Strategy Sub-committee of CSD.


 


5.                 Wanchai Local Agenda 21


 


On behalf of PCSD, Dr WK Chan, provided guidance to the Wanchai District Council in their preparation of the first Local Agenda 21 – a Sustainable Development Strategy for Wanchai.  The report was completed and endorsed by the Wanchai District Council.


 


 


6.                 West Kowloon Cultural District and People’s Panel on West Kowloon


 


PCSD representatives, Mr Mau Chi Wang, Dr WK Chan and Ir Albert Lai , continued to serve at the Core Group of PPWK together with other members primarily from the arts and culture sector. Whilst the government has tabled its proposal for the way forward, PPWK made representations at Legco regarding the still-deficient aspects of the current development proposal.


 


     7.     Training course with Hong Kong Securities Institute


 


Under the guidance of Councillor Dr Jeanne Ng, the third training course on corporate sustainability was held for security analysts in collaboration with Hong Kong Securities Institute. Ir Albert Lai delivered the lecture on behalf of PCSD.


 


8.            Harbourfront Planning


 


As a member of Citizen Envisioning @ Harbour, PCSD continued its interest in the planning process for the harbourfront, and in relation to issues discussed at the Harbourfront Enhancement Committee. The height restrictions imposed by the Government at North Point and the reduced scale of development at the former North Point Estate reflected a certain level of success by the many years of lobbying efforts by the civil society.


 


9.            Sustainablity Report


 


PCSD continued to serve as an endorser to ACCA, the Hong Kong Arm of the UK Accounting body, in its Sustainability Reporting Award. Chairman Ir Albert Lai also continued to serve as a member of the judging panel for the fourth year and delivered a speech on behalf of the panel at the award-giving ceremony in December 2007.


 


10.         Sustainability course offered with HKU Master Programme


 


Councillor Dr Jeanne Ng and Dr Hung Wing Tat led the effort in offering a course on sustainable development in a Master degree programme with HKU, CUPEM. This serves as an important platform to enlist more young professionals in the SD movement.


    


 


11.        UN Climate Change Conference in Bali


 


PCSD was accredited the official observer status by the United Nations for COP13 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In conjunction with the Hong Kong University , PCSD organised a Hong Kong NGO Delegation to the Bali Conference in December 2007. The delegation comprised 18 members, including 13 student leaders. A post-Bali Workshop and Forum was held on 20 Feburary 2008 for sharing by all Bali delegates, including those from Government and the business sector. The forum was well-attended with around 80 participants.


 


12.       Radio Programme hosting


 


Vice-Chairman Plato Yip co-hosted a weekly programme at Metro Radio throughout the year. Sustainability issues were key topics in the programme which has served as an important venue for public education.


 


13.        Public Talks and Lectures


 


Various public talks and lectures were conducted by PCSD councillors and members throughout the year for the benefit of schools, universities and the public, including those a series of talks for the students of AISEC at the Chinese University of Hong Kong .


 


*                      *                  *


23 February 2008


2008年2月24日 星期日

白禮達神父,您可安好?


今天我收到一張去年參加華仁一家親步行籌款時的照片,令我回想起當年做「華仁仔」的美好時光。華仁的學校生活瀰漫著「自由主義」的味道。我記起其中一次經歷,是在我當學生會主席的一年。學生會的工作可以說是廢寢忘餐,有一天為了籌備一個「社會週」的活動,在華仁留至深夜,從油麻地回到我在梨木樹村的家裏己是凌晨一時,結果第二天早上變了遲到大王。


當我從斜路走入校舍的時候,Father Brady白禮達神父正在講授第三堂課。他從課室往下望見我,便走到窗前當著所有同學面笑向我揮手,我只得一臉尷尬地跑上課室。坐下之後,卻是一切如常,Fr Brady和所有同學似乎對我十分諒解,一切盡在不言中。


白神父是一位研究哲學的耶穌會神父,他從不同學傳教,你卻可以從他身上感受到一種寬大、博愛的精神。後來白神父因健康欠佳,在2001年返回愛爾蘭,並於去年以八十一高齡辭世。白神父的親切笑臉已永遠烙在我的九華歲月記億


2008年2月18日 星期一

2008年財政預算案前瞻論壇

2008218日,我以公共專業聯盟主席的身份出席了由公共專業聯盟和陳方安生議員辦事處聯合主辦的2008年財政預算案前瞻論壇,發表專題演講,介紹了由公共專業聯盟在20081月發表的「公平、前瞻、發展-就善用政府財政盈餘的研究報告」。


 


該報告建議以下措施:


建議一:為弱勢群體提供特惠金


建議特區政府發放5,000元“特惠金”予以下兩類弱勢群體人士,包括:


 所有社會保障計劃受助人,包括綜合社會保障援助計劃 (下稱“綜援”)、高齡津貼、以及傷殘津貼的受助人;及


 "低薪奮鬥族”:指那些工作月入8,000元以下的人士;他們雖然收入微薄,但仍努力不懈工作以維持生計,為社會作出貢獻,值得施予援手。


 



建議二:提供交通津貼


特區政府應在2008/09財政年度提供“一刀切”的交通津貼,乘客使用公共交通工具(跨境交通線除外)可即時通過八達通系統獲得30%的折扣。我們估計,特區政府須撥出62億元作為提供交通津貼的用途。


 







建議三:設立 “市民戶口”


我們建議特區政府為全港成年市民設立旨在兼顧個人發展及退休生活需要的個人戶口,名為“市民戶口”。特區政府為每一個持有香港永久居民身份證的成年人士開設“市民戶口”,並存入4,000元作為“種子基金”。





建議四設立應對氣候變化基金


特區政府應撥出80億元的財政盈餘,設立一個“應對氣候變化基金”。該基金主透過不同的資助計劃,在住戶、社區以至跨境區域性層面推動“低碳”和具“能源效益”的發展策略。該基金的主要組成部份為:


      “低碳發展專業支援計劃” (5億元)


      “綠色社區資助計劃” (20億元)


      “綠色家居資助計劃” (5億元)


      “珠三角應對氣候變化基金” (50億元)



在論壇的討論部份,我跟其他講者及與會公眾人士,進一步討論了來年預算案的規劃和作出總結。


 



公共專業聯盟在20081月發表的「公平、前瞻、發展-就善用政府財政盈餘的研究報告」,可於以下網頁下載:
http://www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Report%20Chi.pdf (中文版)


http://www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Ex%20Sum%20Chi.pdf (中文版摘要)


http://www.procommons.org.hk/documents/20080204_report_eng_final.pdf (英文版)



2008年2月12日 星期二

讓焚化爐化為發展新機遇

(原載於 信報 2008-02-12 13)


2003年,由當時的政務司司長曾蔭權擔任主席的可持續發展委員會宣告成立。不久後在一次會議上,負責環境事務的廖秀冬局長情詞懇切地表示垃圾堆填區將於十年內爆滿,希望委員會趕緊制訂固體廢物管理的可持續發展策略。委員會接納了建議,並由筆者負責召集一個專家支援小組,讓公眾通過新形式的互動參與制訂策略。


 


經過支援小組內一眾專家的努力,兩年後委員會向政府提交了管理固體廢物的全方位策略,涵蓋了源頭減廢、回收再用、焚化減量與堆填的具體目標。轉眼間又過了三年,環境局終於在上月底公佈了建設焚化爐的初步選址報告,表示尚要多花兩年時間在石鼓洲與屯門曾咀兩者進行環評和工程研究,焚化爐最快可在2014年落成。


 


其實早於2005年,專家支援小組在制訂可持績發展策略的過程中,已經取得當時大多數持份者同意把高温燃燒發電的焚化設施列入整體管理策略。況且,只要採用先進技術,興建一個安全、美觀、符合嚴格環保標準的焚化爐絕非難事。究竟是什麼原因使港府高層把這項目一直視為燙手山芋?


NIMBY 成為政府大忌


直接原因只有一個:政府一直害怕處理「別放在我家後園」症候群 (NIMBY Not In My BackYard Syndrome),擔心焚化爐落戶的地區有極大反響。背後根源有三:政府一直沒有在政策認受性、公平性、和爭取市民信任三方面着力,以致把一個符合公眾利益的工程項目,一拖再拖。


 


香港中文大學環境政策及資源管理中心去年進行了一個詳盡的研究,分析了焚化爐、堆填區及污水廠等不受當地社區歡迎的設施所面對的選址困難。這些設施的特點是它們均被認定符合公眾利益,為社會發展所必需,但在它們選址落戶之處卻為當地社區帶來負面的環境、經濟或社會影響。這種矛盾在全球越來越普遍,令這些「露露」設施 (LULU Locally Unwanted Land Use) 選址成為各國政府的大難題。


 


在七、八十年代,多數政府對「別放在我家後園」症候群嗤之以鼻,認定是個別社羣自私自利、不顧大局的表現。但從九十年代開始,這種取態發生變化,「別放在我家後園」症候群往往發揮了正面作用,凸顯了公共政策向弱勢社羣轉移風險的不公義,促使政府重新審視相關項目的合理性,從而推動可持續生產模式、有助提升公民意識和改善公眾參與政策制訂的程序。因此歐美多國政府揚棄了過去技術官僚、只重硬件論證的決策模式,改為強調賦權社區、伙伴參與的自願選址模式。


就以本案例而言,政府的首要職責是致力為興建焚化爐的政策取得無可置疑的認受性。由於焚化處理只是廢物處理的第三項優先環節,港府應向公眾證明它在源頭減廢和回收再用首兩個環節已經全力以赴、無懈可擊。顯然,環境局必須加速落實生產者責任制、家居廢物收費、限制可回收產品傾入堆填區等措施,顯示減無可減的決心,才能說服市民興建焚化爐是「必要之惡」,立於不敗的道德高地。


 


專業支援與公平補償


政府必須克服的第二道難關是建立一套讓市民信任的機制,坦誠接受居民作為共同決策的伙伴。一個設施所導致的風險對於專家來說是客觀、可計算的,但對於居民來說是主觀的判斷 ─ 對主事當局是否信任就變成關鍵因素。政府不能再沿用過往聘請「顧問公司」閉門研究的模式,最終必須賦予居民獨立的專業支援,使居民從選址、設計、興建到運作的整全過程均參與監管,從互動中建立信任。


 


政府的第三道難關是讓受焚化爐負面影響的地區得到公平待遇。例如加拿大阿爾伯特省天鵝山的一個廢物設施,由於當局提供一系列補償措施,振興當地疲弱的經濟,所以獲得當地八成居民支持而順利興建。環境局必須突破過往的僵化政策,尋求跨部門、全方位的配套措施以符合地區的發展需要。只要把眼光放遠,把興建焚化爐視為建設可持續社區的一個契機,投放的資源便不會白廢。最近路政署就興建中九龍幹線而重新在油麻地區展開公眾參與社區規劃的活動,便是工程師採納新思維的良好例証。


若果政府能夠闖過這三關,建成焚化爐之餘更足以開拓三個方向的發展機遇:建立整全配套的可持續管理固體廢物策略;開拓一套以專業支援為基礎的公眾參與模式;和樹立公平發展可持續社區的新路向。這些發展機遇的價值遠遠超於一個焚化爐工程的經濟效益。


 


市民的期待不在於2014年焚化爐落成啓用,而是曾蔭權政府破除親疏有別,以新思維開拓發展機遇的政治决心。


 


2008年2月5日 星期二

財政盈餘與「階梯式飛躍」

(原載於 信報 2008-02-05 9)


澳洲國會去年十一月大選,工黨黨魁陸克文大勝已連任總理十一年的保守派領袖霍華德。這場選舉引證了一個民主體制的優良現象:政治競爭激發了政策理念的創新,讓社會大眾通過自由選擇促成社會進步。


  澳洲選民通過大選擁抱了創意與改革,送走了不思進取的政府,獲得了「階梯式飛躍」直線上升的一步、讓政策理想立即實現的一步。


民主選舉激發新思維


  這種「階梯式飛躍」的社會進步方式,香港有幸一嚐嗎?觀乎去年的特首選舉,明知必勝的建制方無意開創新理念,而市民基於「理性」考慮,對於必敗的挑戰者的新思維亦無心認真討論,結果最大的輸家是所有香港人。


  特區政府運用創意的最大契機,莫如財政司司長曾俊華在本月底即將公布的財政預算案。過去兩年,政府在財政盈餘的情況下,主要是採取一些減免差餉稅收、微調稅率稅階、略加額外恩恤等小措施。但面對今年估計過千億元的財政盈餘,一個負責任的政府斷不能錯過善用盈餘以推動可持續發展、回應「M型社會」與全球化挑戰的機遇。


  善用盈餘的新措施應在理念上依循兩項基本原則:公平與前瞻性。過去的寬免措施只惠及擁有物業或中、高薪的納稅階層,新措施應惠及全港市民,並特別幫助最受經濟轉型影響的弱勢群體,始能符合公平原則。至於是否符合前瞻性的原則,應視乎新措施能否打破一些徵狀初現、但阻礙社會長遠發展的重大樽頸。


  至於在操作層面,新措施應致力滿足三項原則:高效率(低行政成本),減低通脹影響,及維持政府財政管理的彈性。


設立市民戶口


  按照上述原則,特區政府可撥出四百七十二億元,以一籃子的方式推動以下四項措施:  一、全港「市民戶口」:為了公平地藏富於民,政府可以為每位年滿十八歲的永久居民開設一個「市民戶口」,並存入四千元作為種子基金,其中二千元留作退休用途,其餘二千元可以讓市民即時提取作個人發展用途。此舉共需款二百二十六億元。「市民戶口」是長遠基礎建設的一環,因應人口高齡化及社會競爭對個人發展的需要,它可以按照未來社會抉擇演變為一個多用途戶口。日後政府亦應將每年度財政盈餘的固定份額撥入「市民戶口」。


  二、弱勢群體「特惠金」:鑑於高通脹重臨,特區政府可以發放五千元「特惠金」給以下兩類弱勢人士:社會保障計劃受助人,包括領取綜援、生果金以及傷殘津貼的人士;及月入八千元以下的在職「低薪奮鬥族」。此舉共需款一零四億元,可惠及約二百萬人。


  三、公共交通津貼:公共交通支出是住戶開支中的第三大類別,最近連串加費的浪潮,波及絕大部分的香港市民,特別是貧窮家庭,生活質素受嚴重影響。若選擇性地提供補貼,範圍太窄則於事無補,範圍太闊則行政費用高昂而得不償失。因此,政府應向所有公共交通工具的乘客通過八達通提供一刀切的交通津貼。為期一年的三成折扣共需款六十二億元。


  四、「應對氣候變化基金」:全球暖化已經成為國際社會的共同挑戰,若香港能夠作出前瞻性的回應,不但有助紓緩一些本地空氣污染和城市設計的矛盾,更可以加強國際城市的地位。政府可撥出八十億元,設立「應對氣候變化基金」,推行以下四項本地和跨境措施:五億元用於「低碳發展專業支援計劃」;二十億元用於「綠色社區資助計劃」;五億元用於「綠色家居資助計劃」和五十億元用於「珠三角應對氣候變化基金」。


以盈餘突破樽頸


  今年是曾俊華出任財政司司長後的第一份財政報告,他面臨的抉擇:一是躲在「審慎理財」的擋箭牌背後,作一些政治權宜的舉措,為政府減壓和為自己添些掌聲;一是掌握先機,針對「M型社會」、貧窮、環境的深層次矛盾,為打開樽頸制約而努力。


  雖然港人不能夠通過民主選舉選擇「階梯式飛躍」的進步,但總盼望從新任的財政司身上看到多一點政治勇氣。


公共專業聯盟主席


  註:公共專業聯盟《就善用政府財政盈餘的研究報告》全文,可從http://www.procommons.org.hk/documents/Budget%20Report%20Chi.pdf 下載