反枱


Bruce Head財爺公佈預算,社民連三子例牌搞事,上次向特首擲蕉,今次更激,幾乎跟財爺反枱,最後當然被逐離場。

說是搞事,或許言重了,畢竟搞事與否,見人見智,非常主觀;是「譁眾取寵」,還是「為民請命」,小弟才疏學淺,無從判斷。但有一點可以肯定,做議員真係幾爽,不但薪高糧準,且能隨時放工,只要走到台前,跟主席「打聲招呼」,就可「奉旨走人」。難怪每次選舉,都吸引各路英雄競折腰。

不過,打工仔切忌模仿,人家是「尊貴」議員,享有特權,加上有萬千選民做後盾,財爺再好打,也不敢動其分毫。如果有人不自量力,有樣學樣,跟老闆反枱,一定沒好下場。現在經濟不景,找工作難,千萬不要幹此等傻事。

講開社民連,不得不提長毛,他是一條好漢,還未入黨,已經在街頭抗爭,抬棺材,燒衣紙,甚麼都有。他信馬克思,我信史密斯,雖然道不同,我也佩服他的勇氣。社會需要像他之人,平衡一下,否則土共會更加放肆。

自從長毛當選後,將街頭抗爭帶入議會,除了搞活氣氛,不見得有何特別貢獻。選前選後,還是一個樣,唯一分別,是以前食自己,現在食公帑,我懷念以前的長毛,就是這個原因。

原文刊於AM730 09年2月27日號P.4「新國富論」欄。

廣告

反枱” 有 14 則迴響

  1. 薯,
    This may be of little fault of your own, your view of 長毛 is the media/typical view of 長毛. Yes, he “在街頭抗爭,抬棺材,燒衣紙,甚麼都有". But you, like most HKers, simply haven’t dug deeper than the superficial theatrics and look closer of what he actually does behind the scene.

    As someone who made a documentary about him by tagging along him for a month (a bit soon after his election in 2004), I know he worked hard behind the scene in trying to help the HKers who have real problems and those made appointments to visit his office for help.

    Most HKers are not interested in the side of him that is clam and thoughtful. These clam & reflective moments don’t sell newspaper/TV-shows/news/blog-entries, so no one is interested. Why go against the current and dig deeper when it is so easy to brand him as a rebel that does no good?

    Of course, I can’t and won’t agree with everything that he does. But seeing you write,
    “自從長毛當選後,將街頭抗爭帶入議會,除了搞活氣氛,不見得有何特別貢獻。選前選後,還是一個樣,唯一分別,是以前食自己,現在食公帑,我懷念以前的長毛,就是這個原因。"
    makes me very disappointed in your unfair comment. In my view, regurgitating typical media BS without digging deeper is not good.

    Have a read of this entry and related materials if you wish. The documentary is 71 minutes long and available online via a link there,
    http://ca8hk.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/long-hair/

    P.S. If you have a personal concern that you think a LegCo member can help, try calling up his office and arrange an appointment to express your grievance.

    P.P.S. While Long Hair can defend himself, it will be my pleasure if you like to chat more. Simply send me an email and we can chat offline.

  2. P.P.P.S. “… 今次更激,幾乎跟財爺反枱,最後當然被逐離場。" I didn’t see the footage as they may upset me (I don’t know). But my point is that those are their “theatrics", their “show" when they deem the traditional method won’t get the attention they wish.

    What I hope you and others won’t simply judge him by his theatrics.

    Have you seen the film American Beauty ? Lester is a bad man to some people. To me, he is a complex man. A fault man but ultimately a redeemable and decent man. We just have to look pass the surface superficial and try to see the “real" him. Kevin Spacey did a great job.

  3. kempton:

    真抱歉,我的文章令你失望,不過,未知閣下有無留意以下一句:

    「自從長毛當選後,將街頭抗爭帶入議會,除了搞活氣氛,不見得有何『特別』貢獻。」

    「特別」二字,是重點。我不是說他沒有貢獻,而是說他沒有「特別貢獻」。為甚麼長毛要有「特別貢獻」?因為選民對他有「特別期望」。

    無錯,長毛好努力為基層爭取福利,但同樣工作,李卓人等議員一樣好努力做,他們有甚麼分別?如果我想政府立法推行最低工資、最高工時,我為甚麼要投票給長毛?投票給李卓人不是一樣嗎?

    再說,長毛堅持平反六四,爭取普選,知其不可為而為之,勇氣可嘉,但泛民議員不是一樣有同樣訴求嗎?我又為甚麼要把票投給長毛,而不是其他泛民議員?

    你知道嗎?長毛第一次當選議員,我是有份投票給他的,如果你以為我不了解長毛,甚或對長毛有偏見,那就大錯特錯了。

    我為甚麼要投票給長毛?因為我對他有「特別期望」。那是二零零四年,香港剛經歷沙士,經濟插底,加上建華之亂,廿三條之爭,保皇黨肆虐,我覺得香港政治已成一譚死水,需要新思維,新衝擊,個人認為, 長毛能擔此大任,若能盡一分力,把他送入議會,有望顛覆保守勢力,繼而打破僵局。

    好可惜,自從七一教訓後,保皇黨似乎有點「醒覺」,不再盲目保皇,而葉劉及老董先後下台,令泛民頓失假想敵,也令長毛落得「英雄無用武之地」,只能像其他基層議員﹝如李卓人等﹞,為民請命爭福利,加上例牌的平反六四、爭取普選,走的是泛民舊路,昔日的鮮明角色,開始隨年月而淡化。這是我對長毛失望的主要原因。

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    你認為,長毛等人「做戲」,是迫於無奈,因為不這樣做,就不能引人注目,也就無法表達他們的訴求。

    這個想法,對一半,錯一半。

    我同意,非常時期,就要用非常手段,為了見報,做場戲都無所謂,但要選對地方,議會是議政的地方,不是做戲的地方,更加不是反枱的地方。

    我說過了,社會需要像長毛等人,平衡一下,否則土共會更加放肆。問題是,他的抗爭應該在議會外,而非議會內。他可以在議會內跟官僚唇槍舌劍,散會後,再到出面枱棺材,燒衣紙,無問題。但不應該在議會內發難,如果其他議員有樣學樣,為了爭取曝光率而在議會內互相擲蕉,那成何體統?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    P.S. 你單憑我一篇四百多字的短文,而斷定我以偏概全,這跟﹝你以為﹞我單憑幾個電視鏡頭,而斷定長毛有破壞無建設,兩者有何分別?

  4. Hi Bruce,

    Sorry that I could only comment based on what you wrote in the 400 words short essay and how I interpreted it. It will nicer if I can comment on what you were thinking or commenting on your entry like an old friend, unfortunately I can neither read your mind nor I am your friend to know how you think.

    Now, again, I can only comment based on what you wrote in the reply.

    Well, I guess you expected too much from readers like me to see “不見得有何特別貢獻" has 「特別」二字,是重點。"「特別」" can be a very wide spectrum from a simple passing comment to what you ended up expanding on.

    Thanks for adding your additional expanded explanation of “「特別期望」。那是二零零四年,[…] 我覺得香港政治已成一譚死水,需要新思維,新衝擊,個人認為, 長毛能擔此大任, […] 繼而打破僵局。"

    Now, with LH’s single vote in a rigged 30/30 LegCo, I guess you were much more optimistic in his ability to “繼而打破僵局" than I was. I had hope of him bring issues up, and changing minds of some young adults or kids, but not the outcome of important votes and let alone “繼而打破僵局". We just have a difference of expectation here.

    “你認為,長毛等人「做戲」…" Well, Bruce, I wrote “But my point is that those are their “theatrics”, their “show” when they deem the traditional method won’t get the attention they wish." I was writing what I suspect they think, nothing to do with my view. Note: “… their “theatrics”, their “show” when they deem …"

    One last thing, while this may hard for you to believe, I actually mean well with my critiques. which is why I am spending some time to discuss things with you.

    Finally, may be I am overly sensitive or cordial and has lost touch with watch people expect but I sense, rightly or wrongly, tone of 單單打打 in the essay and some of the words can be shortened without losing the key meaning/message..

    1) “但有一點可以肯定,做議員真係幾爽,不但薪高糧準,且能隨時放工,只要走到台前,跟主席「打聲招呼」,就可「奉旨走人」。難怪每次選舉,都吸引各路英雄競折腰。"

    2) “不過,打工仔切忌模仿,人家是「尊貴」議員,享有特權,加上有萬千選民做後盾,財爺再好打,也不敢動其分毫。如果有人不自量力,有樣學樣,跟老闆反枱,一定沒好下場。"

    Good luck to you Bruce,
    Kempton

    P.S. I may not have time to leave really long comment like this. I guess, this may be a “good thing" for you. 🙂

  5. Kempton: 單單打打is a market appeal. HK newspaper readers may think this kind of style very 過癮. 陶傑 get famous using this approach too. Newspaper article is not an academic essay, it’s half entertainment and half opinion leader.

  6. Hi kempton:

    是的,我在文中只寫上「特別貢獻」,沒有附帶解釋,但單看「特別」二字,應該不會理解為「沒有貢獻」吧?

    而講得上是「特別貢獻」,當然不是指開了多少次會,或接見了多少個市民之類的日常工作。

    唯一問題,是長毛到底是否一定要有「特別貢獻」。我認為應該有,其他人可能未必這樣想。他們可能覺得,長毛只需做好本份,一如其他議員,已經足夠。這確是見仁見智。

    你覺得我太樂觀,選了一個長毛,就可以打破僵局,我當然沒有這麼樂觀,剛剛相反,在沙士年間,我跟其他市民一樣,非常悲觀,投票選長毛,只是別無他法下的唯一方法,一如沉船,乘客在大海漂浮,見到一塊木板,一定會死抱著不放,希望可以捱到有人救,事實是否真的如此呢?未必,可能未等到有人救,已經凍死了,但不這樣做,還可以做甚麼呢?

    想當年,不少人選長毛,的確有這個想法,保皇黨太惡,泛民太軟弱,將長毛送入議會,看看可否打破僵局,就算不能打破僵局,也起碼踏出了第一步。

    但正如我所講,七一後的兩年間,政局開始變化,泛民失去假想敵,長毛也落得英雄無用武之地。我認為,他與其繼續在議會內胡鬧,不如重回街頭,那裡才是最適合他的舞台。

    至於單單打打,是因為我實在不滿他們的所為,所以才有此諷刺,有甚麼不妥呢?

    最後,請放心,我相信你的批評是出於善意的,這從字裡行間就看得出,如果你將來有時間,歡迎隨時留言,互相交流。我也希望從別人的善意批評中學習。

    祝好。

  7. aimak

    長毛的「特別貢獻」
    1) 截聽條例事件
    – 成功司法復核, 令政府不能再如過去般隨便可以截聽市民電話, 保障了全港 700 萬人的人權及私隱權.
    2) 囚犯投票事件
    – 成功司法復核, 爭取囚犯擁有投票權力, 保障了香港人參與政治的權力.
    3) 最低工資
    – 司法復核失敗, 背上堂費百多萬
    – 個個議員都說支持最低工資, 但個個都是咀巴說說, 真正願意冒風險替市民爭取的, 只有長毛一人.
    4) 民間電台
    – 持續多年的抗爭, 多次被控告, 多次被沒收器材, 只為爭取開放大氣電波, 言論自由.

    你可以指出有另外一個議員比長毛有更多「特別貢獻」的, 我立即閉咀.

  8. waddle

    某些議員的而且確,開會不久即會走人。霍震霆、李國寶等,都是「雷霆救兵」,政府不夠票,這些人等收 CALL 即到,投完即「鬆」,欺場白逗公帑,無恥莫甚於此。

    施政報告、財政預算,內容事先張揚(明報主筆身為傳媒中人,自家報紙於預算公佈前已大篇報道內容,敢稱人家不先聽人說完即動手抗議,公信力於明眼人前已蕩然無存),乖乖坐下等他唸完,即使人人昏昏欲睡,張目而神遊太虛,是「俾面」。電視直播,記者悶得發慌,想找題材,要抗議者,此其時也。

    議員被逐,同日再開其他委員會,一樣可以出席。而開會時只要想離席,不用走到主席台,自己起來向外走即可;不盡責者更可以到也不到。

    社民連長毛等人為全職議員,參加之委員會足叫他們天天開會;薯淘之言,會令人聯想到三人不盡議員之責(此亦妨間不闇政治之人的誤解)。君佔用傳媒公器,應作負責任之評論,既已為文如此,實有澄清之必要。

  9. 魚蛋

    作者想法可謂成果論。如果人人都要追求特別貢獻,名留青史,無疑揠苗助長,弄巧反拙。

    議會各人,各懷鬼胎,勾心鬥角。有人打民主旗號實反之而行,有人明目保皇卻又忽然民主。這代表什麼?一個商人主導的香港,以利為先,見風轉舵,其立場之飄忽,為年青一派所不齒。

    欲成大事,難道要學孔孟之道,四處造訪,陳述利害?更何況孔孟之道也不為當時昏庸之六國採用,就算你有青雲壯志,若時不與、地不利、人不和,徒然。

    孔孟之道,非求一時之苟安,而是萬世之和諧。今日你若能左右議會,勵精圖治,他日你人退下來,仍能長治久安?社民連之道,貴在令人注目,然後人靠自身知識,總有得著,使政治構圖變得寬廣,政治人才亦能愈趨年輕。

    當然,激進行為只是表面,內裏是一腔熱血,感染到別人,令人有豐收的期待。背後所做的政績,不是要詔告天下,而是你在享受之時,你那飲水思源的心會偶爾想起:表面市井,內裏細心的人幫你幹過什麼。

    如果沒有這顆心,應該自賞一條香蕉。

  10. Andrew

    “做議員真係幾爽,不但薪高糧準,且能隨時放工,只要走到台前,跟主席「打聲招呼」,就可「奉旨走人」。難怪每次選舉,都吸引各路英雄競折腰。" False statement 100% sure. for reference, longhair.hk or youtube.com and search for Leung kwok Hong, then you would not that’s not true.

    “如果有人不自量力,有樣學樣,跟老闆反枱,一定沒好下場。現在經濟不景,找工作難,千萬不要幹此等傻事。" Sometimes you do not understand how this government is composed. According to your statement, 老闆 refers to those officers/Chief Executive, i would say your logic is wrong.
    Boss is a person who gives you orders, but Chief Executive is a person who is kept trackers by people.

    hope you understand politic in hong kong more

  11. Nobody

    04年選長毛入去,選民既投票動機可能真係如你所想,個社會氣氛太不景氣,唯有對長毛有「特別期望」,打破一下悶局。

    08年選長毛入去,選民既投票動機就已經跳左去另一層次,除對佢之前四年既貢獻既肯定之外,亦係選民對議會既合法性同議事功能既新既深切體悟同質疑:『在這沒有民意基礎的議會,跟街頭查實有何分別?仲有冇既有既「尊嚴」?係冇既。』

    七一過後,公眾政治更趨冷感,越來越少人對立法會新聞更感興趣。社民連的顛覆,也就同時喚醒公眾對立法會的存在。在民主路途中,這裡政治動作就是對公民自覺及民主覺醒重要起步。

    同埋,用政府官員喻作老闆確實極之失當,這是政治ABC。

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s