2012年3月2日 星期五

可以理解,不能原諒

曾蔭權照讀iPad文稿
3月1日香港史無前例的立法會質詢,他不承認大錯,只是求饒,講話照本宣科,無甚新意;但是他的恭謹表現(表演?),與其一貫的高官派頭,已有天淵之別。

香港特首辦的Facebook網頁,幾乎是即時貼出該段發言,可見是一早擬好的行貨。以往曾有網友在這個網頁留言不中聽而遭刪除,今次到3月2日下午,留言總數已逾700,壓倒性是罵特首的留言,最刻薄無情咒他坐監的,都留在版面之上。曾蔭權任公職45年,還有幾個月便退休,「一鋪清袋」盡失民望到這個地步,能不悲乎!

前文「謹小慎微」,我道破了曾蔭權涉嫌收受利益的癥結:

......曾蔭權說他享受這些「方便」,通通有申報,我信。問題是他的申報,要哪個「上司」審核嗎?還是這些申報,僅是循例備案即可呢?......曾蔭權的問題,可能當初真是託大,或墮入思想的盲點,以為申報了,又繳交了一般人應付的船費和機票錢,就免除了一切責任,對「 謹小慎微」的敏感度不足......


......官員地位越高,不是越加「無王管」;一舉一動,無不影響整個社會,逃不過傳媒的監察,「 謹小慎微」就更重要了。


在答問會上,他證實了特首根據公務員規例的精神,自己批准自己的原則------他是特區之首,原來真是的「無王管」的,一切但問良心。回應梁家傑提問這些原則有沒有紀錄為憑?何時設立?行政會議討論過否?曾蔭權皆迴避不答,使人懷疑------根本就沒有紀錄

曾蔭權爵士,我相信你是一個不貪錢的長官;我相信你沒有收黑錢,也沒有運用權位,出memo或打電話影響下屬審批公共項目的決定;你拍賣藏酒,得款百多萬,全部撥充善舉,值得稱道。

問題是「問心無愧」這個說法,不能救命。你沒有做給大家看你有刻意檢點和避嫌,現在給人拿著把柄,水洗唔清矣。

這也證明了完善的制度有多麼重要,既是防範不軌行為,也是保護自己。公務員做事,依例而行,有需要則請示上級,提出建議問是否endorsed,也可以必要時出memo問有關部門有甚麼comments,幾時幾日收不到貴署的反對我就進行....功架做齊才去馬,縱然有錯,則罪不在己。我做公務員時,大家俗稱這些程序為「撐番把遮」,可以擋風擋雨的意思。

特首的上司遠在北京,沒有這把保護傘,處理這些事情,只須問心和自律,職是之故,自己孭晒上身。香港是一個財金億萬計的鱷魚潭,特首必須周旋在各方財閥之間。中國人社會關係千百重,順得哥情失嫂意,坐過一次A大亨的順風車,很難拒絕坐B大亨的順風遊艇。時間一久,溫水煮蛙效應,當事人防範稍弱,便會有思想盲點。

地產公司「捐贈」二手步行機,放在官邸,退休時不打包據為己有,咪得囉!自己行得正坐得正,公私分明,過澳門純是私人宴會,便服一度、煲tie都沒有打,吃餐飯聽費玉清唱歌、聯,以便施政,不涉其他,無事呱?但這沒可能的。

人人都有權結交私人朋友,但是身任公職,位置越高,「私人朋友」越難保持。如果曾蔭權還是做當初考入政府的的二級行政主任,他可以在私人朋友之間暢所欲言,因為他的決定權和所知的極之有限,人家也不會怎樣看重他的意見。身為16萬公務員、三司十二局之上的特首,香港沒有甚麼事情與他無關,他對任何人的私人交往和說一句甚麼話,都要謹慎避嫌。

這個「款待門」事件,現在不單止是曾蔭權一個人的事,已經影響到30年前的麥理浩時代開始,受到全香港市民稱道的廉政,和整個公務員架構的誠信。

現在廉政公署已備案調查,向特首負責的廉政專員倒轉來調查特首,如履薄冰,動輒得咎,可以想像。如果廉政公署找到足夠的證據,就要律政司決定是否Go ahead。

坐視不理由香港執行家法,抑或派欽差大臣插手匡正朝綱?中央政府也是進退維谷。

看來這是香港回歸15年來,最嚴重的管治危機。

延伸閱讀:

我給特首的一封公開信  (Just Say it-- 前政務主任邵力競的Blog)
醜聞之美(潮池--區家麟的Blog)


(文章允許轉貼,請具作者名字:梁煥松)
...............

58 則留言:

  1. 曾特首為公務員出身,長時間身居高位,沒理由自行制定的規矩並不為公務員團體所接受,亦沒可能與過往案例有所違背,這情況我覺得有三個可能:(1)事前跟本就沒有定下規矩,出事後砌詞推卸責任,這就毫無誠信可言;(2)早有預謀,利用漏洞,獲取個人利益,博北京不會出手;(3)跟本就是低能,不相稱職的公務員,藉時勢登高位而已。RT

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 菩薩心腸的人,會相信他所講,否則是 1 比較有可能。

      刪除
    2. 個人認為第(1)與第(3)皆有可能,曾特首蠻像一個六十五歲的輕度低能兒童呢!

      刪除
    3. 聽過「彼得定律」嗎?
      http://www.hudong.com/wiki/%E5%BD%BC%E5%BE%97%E5%AE%9A%E5%BE%8B

      刪除
    4. 也可以看
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

      刪除
    5. 記否將工程費拆小, 繞過立法會的批准在禮賓府建造鯉魚池一事。他精於此道。事前有自訂比一般公務員低的守則以備不時之需, 一點也不奇。和建造鯉魚池一事一樣, 出了問題, 在法律上你奈他何!?

      刪除
    6. 「知法犯法」,懂得法律的人,才會走得到法律罅。
      制定規例的人,對怎樣 Bend the rules,公務員優為之。

      刪除
  2. 中央一向強調依法辦事、港人治港,現有制度有何法可依、何人可治這個一區之首?如何完善如此制度?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 誰答到這些問題,都可以做特首了。

      刪除
    2. 我覺得日後此情況下,特首需向議會或法院報告,三權分立,即三權監察,互相制衡,其實亦可以是互相卸責。行政之首,應是向議會和法院負責,現在議員申報利益都是向行政方面負責。不過,向議會負責,大陸應是不會想見到,因他們會自動聯想為議會權力大,香港會作反。

      刪除
  3. 我給特首的一封公開信 (Just Say it-- 前政務主任邵力競的Blog)
    最貼切的文章,謝謝分享。

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 語重深長,讀之令人擲卷三歎。

      刪除
  4. 有議員舉三個公務員收受利益被判刑既例子出來, 我覺得正正道出左問題重點.

    唔理係乜野問心無愧, 乜野做特首都有朋友, 而家佢根本就係收受左利益, 佢付出既跟該利益唔等值就係錯. 應該將件案件公開偵訊, 而唔係一句私隱就乜都唔解釋.

    如果話問心無愧就OK, 法律要來做乜? 個個人都唔會話自己錯架啦, 法律就係客觀既尺度, 你係犯左, 就係錯. 如果你係我地選出來既, 我可能都會信你有誠信良知, 你既"問心無愧"或者仲有D份量, 但最弊你唔係呢.

    至於所謂朋友, 如果咁可以當抗辯理由, 咁D乜野收保護費呀, 貪污呀全部唔駛告啦, 邊個夠膽唔認有勢力者係老友姐, 想死嗎?

    而佢所謂既道歉, 有乜實際作用? 西隧會平返幾蚊? 爽報有專欄話佢坐私人飛機, 其實係港人用隧道費幫佢埋單, 咁講可能有D誇張, 但我真係笑唔出.

    如果道左歉就要原諒同唔追究, 咁殺人或者打劫係咪都唔駛坐監?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 講得好。
      有時常識是最直接最對的。

      刪除
  5. 我不太懂政治或法律, 但整件事看來就很羞家, 不只是特首的貪, 連帶各方人士的醜惡也一一顯現. 有失自己志氣助他人威風的感覺. 好希望香港人團結一點.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 群眾會更團結,但是兔死狐悲,既得利益階層也會一樣。

      刪除
  6. 香港人是否堅持公義, 還是已经麻木及無奈讓香港成功進入「一國一制」。曾蔭權事件将是一塊很好的試金石。

    我有一點兒悲觀.

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 立法會都不通過用特權法案追究。
      就看今日的民眾集會的聲勢了。

      刪除
  7. 曾蔭權已經如此,下任特首,不敢想像!

    回覆刪除
  8. I know my viewpoint may not be popular among your readers.

    I am really amazed by the theatrical and relentless pursue on the issue of Mr. Tseng. I ask myself what public purpose the media efforts will serve other than to satisfy the voyeuristic instinct of the masses. Perhaps nothing is more satisfying than to see the rich and powerful falling from grace. What a warped mentality! Did Mr. Tseng break the law? May be or may be not. If he is suspected to have broken the law, then it is a matter for the law enforcement authority to investigate and lay charges when there is evidence. Mr. Tseng is entitled to enjoy the same rights as anyone else. If there is no evidence that he broke the law, then the reports in the public amount to a trial by the media that has no place in a civilized society.

    While the reporting focuses on the theatrics of those involved, there is little debate on the real ills in the HK society. Shouting matches and name calling by the so called “Politicians” only vent the collective anger and frustration of the struggling populace.

    Samson
    Ontario, Canada

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Once you have placed yourself into the public sphere and become a politician, compensated by the public payroll, then you are subjecting yourself to the scrutiny of the public, and you ARE subjected to a different standard than the general public: a heightened, more stringent standard.

      Sure there are other problems in HK, but corruption is one of them. If you don't see a problem here, I pity your perception ability.

      刪除
  9. Yes, everyone supposes to enjoy same legal right under Common Law. But, in politics, especially when you being in high place, entrusted by the people with powers to deliver public good...you are also expected to carry much more responsibilities and obligations. Fair enough?!

    Govt officials or politicians, we expect them to have higher moral and standards, or such govt's legitimacy will suffer. When one in high place is suspected with credibility issues, whether they come from having committed moral and/or legal wrongs, one will have to face moral and political consequences unfortunately. This is even when the law can't deal with him/her, we still got free press, expressions...and public opinions, which being lifeblood for democracy, man. There is no free lunch, man, using the American term. Can't take the heat, stay out of kitchen, man!

    We are actually looking for statesmen/stateswomen to work for us. But, unfortunately all we got now worldwide being just politicians at best. Better than nothing perhaps; our statesmen/stateswomen are not yet in the parliaments!! Perhaps only god can help!!!

    bobfung, Sydney, Australia

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 好像邵力競的文章所言,曾特首的是很不好做的工作。
      其實政客的工作,和很多高位的工作何屬不然。
      我看過有些評論,女王、王子等等,都是worst job on earth,一點都不過癮。
      政客和皇室,有十分優厚的薪俸回報,人民是沒有待薄他們的。
      生於深宮,貴為皇室,不是自己的選擇,但是政客的職位,是要經過激烈競選爭回來的。香港人說「食得鹹魚抵得渴」,西人也說If you can't stand the heat , get out of the kitchen.
      政客受人民監督、要遵受操守的要求,有時還要低聲下氣,都是無得怨的。

      刪除
    2. 單看英國王室,就知是苦差,王室新聞是其中一個焦點,王室成員需100﹪全天候言行端正,有少少差池,被狗仔隊拍到照,就大件事;訪問行程多,且全家都需要出動;而且英國人常常投訴王室洗費過高,英女王現在都需要交稅。

      刪除
    3. In democracy we entrust the politicians to provide leadership and good unbiased public services. We never expect them to be a moral role model of the society

      Regarding the matter of Mr. Tseng it perhaps needs a public enquiry to determine (1) whether he broke the law and to be charged for his offences, if he did; (2) If no law is being broken, then whether he compromised his judgments and decisions of his office. Until we know all the facts subjecting Mr. Tseng to a mob trial is a travesty to democracy.

      I am amazed to read that there are different rules for people in the high offices.

      We cannot govern a society by moral guidance. No society ever did in the long history of human beings. One set of moral code of one person may not be acceptable to the other. Not even sacred texts in our civilization can provide a moral code and let alone govern the society.

      Samson
      Ontario, Canada

      刪除
    4. 看廉署怎樣處理這些發生在其他公務員的先例,他肯定犯了法。
      立法會不通過引用特權法追究,現在最多是下星期四請再他來,接受餘下議員的提問,表演多一次。

      刪除
  10. Samson

    東方日報倒曾最落力,蘋果日報都沒有去盡!

    回覆刪除
  11. 曾蔭權有阿爺撐, 一百萬人上街反佢都唔會下台

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 未必。
      狡死,走狗烹。
      世事難料。
      不過為了保大局,保埋佢也有可能。

      刪除
    2. 此人可能自持父親給他改個好名「蔭權」 ,時時諗住自己的權力有所庇蔭,所以做自己喜歡做嘅事而不顧自己的身份,又以為無王管,才至到有今天嘅地埗。其實他不止今次令香港人蒙羞,上次把「文革」說成是「極端民主」,真令外人誤以為香港沒有叻人,竟然揾個咁嘅人做特首,難怪第一位回應的「匿名」説有三個可能。

      刪除
    3. 孟子:「不仁而在高位,是播其惡於眾也。」
      一語中的!

      刪除
  12. 眼淚是假的悲哀是真的

    2012年03月03日
    蔭權先生終於親臨立法會,面對質問,忍受煎熬;用湯家驊的說法,以慰民心,以消民怨。
    對,除了這個功效,我們還能期待有什麼新鮮事。不運用特權法去調查,自然只會交代交代過的,表那表過的態。最大亮點,是在那個多小時中,一個從未如此低眉的蔭權,無間地垂頭、如沉思狀,作哽咽語。
    輿論認為那是欲催眼淚不成的蹩腳表演,懷疑論當道之說果然沒錯。我卻選擇相信,相信那不是戲一場,因為有種表情心情叫欲哭無淚。而眼淚可能是假的,悲哀卻是真的。至於為自己而悲還是為自己有辱政府以至全港聲譽而哀,任何特權都查不出個結果來。
    設身處地,拿一個人當人看,蔭權先生是大有資格哭崩一幢曾大屋的。由一個寂寞推銷員夾着尾巴做人,爬了近半世紀天梯,才以「貪官」之名退任,當中無論有沒有寃情,也是寃寃寃。
    蔭權先生錯估的除了民情之嚴苛挑剔,還錯認只有推銷員才寂寞,什麼叫孤家寡人?比白更白的特首,注定比寂寞更寂寞。朋友?在飛機在遊艇在異地在杯酒言歡之間,縱然只談風月,處處守着一把自訂的尺,不涉利益輸送,不涉人情交易,難道就不寂寞?
    水至清無錦鯉,人至察無真友,比白更白的領導應該有這心理準備。事到如今都是錯,錯錯錯,莫莫莫,想瞞瞞瞞,難難難。怕人尋問,咽淚裝歡或裝悲,也為時已晚。

    (林夕)

    回覆刪除
  13. 殖民地時代,英國高官在香港離任後便回英國,和香港完全斷了任何關係,但香港本地華人高官退休後,有些患了急性發錢寒, 未過冷河期便在大公司任職, 梁長文是最佳例子.april

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 高官退休後入商界,未必有好世界他們嘆,一樣要受氣,有好收場的很少。
      老闆不會用一分冤枉錢,前高官的人面、知情的利用價值耗盡,會像爛鞋一樣把他們踢走。

      刪除
    2. 如果你真相信生意イ老(唯利是圖、已無儒商了),仲同イ巨做埋老友,咁你就有難了。

      刪除
    3. 殖民地時代,英國高官在香港離任後也不一定回英國。前財政司翟克誠,退休後不久便出任中電董事局主席。他曾任經濟司和財政司,監管中電是他直接負責的工作,絕對有利益衝突。但是,那時好像沒有人說他涉嫌有延後利益!梁展文申請出任新世界工作時已過了冷河期。另外,殖民地時代,英國高官有否接受英資大行的豪華款待,根本沒有多少人理會。要罵本地華人高官、要為英殖時期貼金也要根據事實。

      potato

      刪除
  14. 曾生錯在自己是皇上,沒有老闆,沒有規條監管,加上天生貪小便宜,受不住物質引誘,導致如此收場。

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 很有可能是這樣。

      刪除
  15. 上帝要你滅亡,必先令你瘋狂。
    感謝天父上帝,祢令我知道佢嘅真面目!原來真係有官商勾結的!

    回覆刪除
  16. 商人做的一切,都是「無死錯人」的,你估真係同你好friend咩!

    回覆刪除
  17. Wonder why still none bought up Bill Clinton's example as an excuse for Tsang now. Bill has survived two terms having escaped an impeachment. Some said political leaders/govt officials may be immoral as long as they could lead. In that case, why the hack the US has become another economic `hell', like HK, by printing money to survive its economy...do you think these perhaps capable leaders and yet with lower moral standard are going to solve the problems that they are entrusted and empowered to for us?!

    上樑不正下樑歪, 國之將亡必有妖孽!! 有咁嘅人民就有咁嘅政府. 更謊謬的是曾聽過一來自國內的女教授說, 毛澤東等曾經用條命去打江山, 所以成功後過了些像中國帝皇時期的荒唐日子, 例如左擁右抱等等, 都屬應該. 怪不得中共會變成今天這個模樣!!! 香港領導人所作所為只小兒科吧. 值得願量?!?! God-damn it, man!!! Wonder why almighty god just keep watching and allowing shits like this to keep happening among innocent peoples worldwide, not only f'king HK/China?!

    回覆刪除
  18. 滾女小事,食豪宴小事,坐私人飛機都是小事。
    但是影響施政,或被人看到覺得合理壞疑影響施政,就是大事;不是口講「問心無愧」、「公私分明」頂得過去的。

    回覆刪除
  19. 但遍有些人就認為我等小事化大, 不念人地45年的功績, 更不認為坐上位的應有更高的專業操守. 人地都係打分工啫, 可必要誅死人. 一切以大局為重, 穩定壓倒一切.

    回覆刪除
  20. 追究罪行時,功過可以相抵就好大鑊。
    高官的「功」,是理所當然;份工做得不好,已經係過。
    大喇喇一個月十幾廿萬薪俸,退休酬金過千萬,唔使做咩?

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 特首月薪是35萬元。

      刪除
    2. 是否「筍工」就兩睇了。

      刪除
  21. 對於我,這個不能理解:
    5 年開支 221 萬,本年度「竟」佔百萬!
    http://hk.news.yahoo.com/%E7%89%B9%E9%A6%96%E8%87%A8%E5%8D%B8%E4%BB%BB%E5%A4%96%E8%A8%AA%E9%96%8B%E6%94%AF%E5%80%8D%E5%A2%9E-%E8%AD%B0%E5%93%A1%E8%B3%AA%E7%96%91-%E6%A8%99%E5%B0%BE%E6%9C%83-%E8%87%AA%E6%88%91%E6%94%BE%E5%81%87-211259034.html

    回覆刪除
  22. 有著數,佔到盡,可以這樣解。
    收錢就不敢,公幹旅遊這些「無形利益」,在其位的人,無不躍躍欲試的。

    回覆刪除
  23. Mobocracy or Democracy?

    Would Mr. Tseng’s critics be happier if he stands stripped naked in the public square and let every citizen in HK to whip him, one lash per person? Or let the police confiscate all his assets and distribute the proceeds to every citizen in HK each getting HK$50. To punish him more he must be denied the right to apply for HK social assistance. Send him to a labour camp in Inner Mongolia for the rest of his life.

    Let cooler heads prevail.

    Should we just let the matter go through a due process, no matter how flawed that may be? The end results may not be to anyone’s satisfaction. The winner is neither Mr. Tseng nor the critics. The real winner is the democracy.

    Samson
    Ontario, Canada

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. 香港現在的democracy還未fully developed,現在希望的是依法調查。
      香港人的民怨,不是一天內形成的,還有就是他平日的表現傲慢,人緣差。
      香港人動不動就罵只是私德有虧,無關社會公義,也事不關己的人做甚麼「世紀賤男」。現在他是公德不對,所以更罵得起勁了。

      刪除
  24. Samson, you think you are living in a democractic country, right?
    http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/democracy.htm
    With all due respect, I think you already ASSUMEd that HK can ONLY either be democractic (your definition only) or ruled by Mobocracy (your definition only too).
    There's ways for people to express themselves in a democractic country/district, right?
    In a democractic country/district, there's no need to allow the political leader staying in his/her position after they are no longer trusted by the citizens, right?

    回覆刪除
  25. Chris,
    I am not that naïve to think HK is a democracy. It is an ideal that most HK people want and strive to have regardless what their understandings are on democracy. In fact democracy carries a wide spectrum of nuances and is still evolving after 200 years since The Enlightenment. Bearing this in mind, the long march towards that ideal must start from somewhere, no matter how small the first step may be.

    One of the key elements in democracy is the rule of law. This is why I am so disgusted on the uncivilized attacks on Mr. Tseng, no matter what “crimes” he committed. To me lynching Mr. Tseng is out of bound of the noble ideal of democracy.

    If people attack Mr. Tseng not because of his “crimes” but of the frustration on their own struggling life and failure to see any hope, this is a much serious social problem. We may fault Mr. Tseng for lacking leadership and vision to ease the social tension. We may use our energy to organize and to suggest alternatives to the administration to adopt. It serves no purpose to lynch Mr. Tseng as we witnessed so far.

    Mr. Tseng is arrogant. Perhaps, most politicians are. However, he has no monopoly of that attitude. You just read the comments in your blog to visualize how many arrogant and self-righteous people in the world. Decency is in short supply.

    Regards

    Samson,
    Ontario, Canada

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. Samson,

      Because of the constitutional status of CE, the existing anti-corruption legislation may not be applicable to Mr Tsang. Thus, it may not be possible for us to charge Mr Tsang with any crime under the current legislation. The problem with Mr Tsang is not that he is immoral in accepting the lavish entertainment from the tycoons but that the CE can have official dealing with the tycoons in different situations and this very act may easily cause the public to question his impartiality in dealing with these tycoons who have offer him the lavish entertainment. This may cause embarrassment to /lower the credibility of the Government as a whole. Thus, as the Head of the Government, Mr Tsang should avoid these acts.

      potato

      刪除
  26. 邵力競:冷漠的傷心城市—— 點一首歌給特首

    http://kurtlau.blogspot.com/2012/03/blog-post_2581.html

    这文章應說出大部份香港人對這事的心聲?

    回覆刪除
  27. 是的,老董講完又講的「我們自己當家作主」的政府,居然是與殖民地時期更離開群眾。
    我前年回香港,上中環的政府合署問一些退休的安排,要看證件,掛來客牌,拍卡過閘,真的防賊一樣,跟我以前做公務員時不同。

    回覆刪除
  28. Address to “potato”

    Thank you for your response.

    We are all well aware of the shortcomings in the laws of HK. Given that situation my point is that:
    Should the critics use their energy to advocate the change of the law, through a due process, constructively to prevent a repeat occurrence; or should the critics continue the verbal assaults on Mr. Tseng till he is punished for his ‘crimes’ without going through the justice system?

    Democracy starts at home.

    Samson
    Ontario, Canada

    回覆刪除
    回覆
    1. No doubt that preventive measures is required. However, many people believe law is a panacea while many people have been doing wrong without breaking the law, and thus many people can avoid taking their responsibilities.

      刪除