新民黨 反對醫管局 縮減公立醫院「動脈內血栓切除術服務」計劃
日期︰2018 年 1 月 9 日
新民黨 得悉指 醫院管理局 （ 醫管局 ） 計劃重整資源 ， 縮減旗下急症醫院醫治急性缺血性中風的動脈內血栓切除術服務 ，將影響病人接受治療的黃金機會，同時增加醫療人員的壓力。新民黨今天（ 9 日）早上向行政長官請願，促請醫管局馬上停止縮減日間動脈內血栓切除術服務的計劃，及盡快將有關服務由日間擴展至廿四小時服務，確保中風病人獲得及時的治療。
新民黨今天舉行記者會 ， 主席 暨 立法會議員葉劉淑儀女士 、 南區區議員陳家珮女士 、 灣仔區議員李文龍先生 、新民黨青年委員會副主席（政策） 葉沛霖醫生 ，聯同社區新創建主席江澤濠先生出席 。
南區區議員陳家珮女士表示：「 我 們 最近接獲 東區及灣仔區的 市民投訴 ， 指醫管局計劃縮減旗下急症醫院醫治急性缺血性中風的動脈內血栓切除術服務 ， 這是不能接受 。 現時全港 每年約有一萬人因缺血性中風入住公立醫院，而平均約三百至五百人需要接受 動脈內血栓切除術 ，此手術與傳統注射溶血針治療不同。 現時全港有七間醫管局旗下 醫院 的神經外科中心提供日間動脈內血栓切除術服務 ， 據了解醫管局計劃最快在下年度開始縮 減 至全港只剩下三至四間醫院提供相關治療服務 。 」
她補充，「 以港島區為例 ， 若區內只剩下港島西聯網的瑪麗醫院提供服務 ， 港島東的急性中風病人需長途跋涉到港島另一 端的醫院 求醫 ， 或者由東區醫院經檢查後要再辦理手續及安排轉到另一醫院才能接受手術 ， 極有可能錯過急救的黃金時間 ，影響 病人 的康復機會 。 」
新民黨青年委員會副主席（政策） 葉沛霖醫生 ，評估 醫管局 計劃縮減相關急性中風治療計劃，分別對 病人、醫生及社會帶來的影響。他認為，「醫管局計劃縮減 全港 公立 醫院 提供的 急性缺血性中風動脈內血栓切除術 ，對病人而言，令病人有機會因手術前評估、轉院手續及多項檢查等因素，錯失治療的黃金機會。對醫生而言，有前線醫生向我們反映，現時醫管局在沒有額外資源下，在公立醫院為病人提供相關治療服務，期望當局未來可增加資源，提供 動脈內血栓切除術服務 。」
「最後，對整體社會而言，縮減公立醫院 的動脈內血栓切除術服務 ，亦增加社會的額外成本。如果病人可以得到適切的治療，能夠康復，生活質素得以提升，併發症機會減少；相反，如因縮減手術服務而減低病人康復的機會，令其行動不便，需長期提供照顧，將增加社會成本，我們認為這方面局方亦應一併考慮。」葉 沛霖醫生總結說。
新民黨主席 暨 立法會議員葉劉淑儀女士 說：「我們收到很多港島區市民反映，東區醫院目前 醫治急性缺血性中風動脈內血栓切除術服務 做得很好，很多病人受惠。但如果日後，港島區只在瑪麗醫院提供相關服務，病人的風險會提高，如因交通等因素，可令病人錯失救治機會。因此我們今早已向行政長官遞交請願信，反對醫管局縮減中風治療的相關計劃。」
社區新創建主席江澤濠先生補充，目前東區醫院服務東區及灣仔等地區市民，人口約七十至八十萬，醫療服務需求非常殷切，加上人口老化极中風年輕化的趨勢，因此認為 醫管局 不應縮減旗下 急症醫院醫治急性缺血性中風動脈內血栓切除術服務 ，反而應該增加資源。
灣仔區議員李文龍則表示，如將兩間公立醫院，即 瑪麗醫院及東區醫院的中風治療 服務合併，擔心病人會因車程影響治療的黃金時間，尤其灣仔日間塞車的情況相當嚴重，需要政府正視。
新民黨今天向行政長官遞交的請願信正式文本，另見附件。
請願信正式文本下載
|
|
|
Hong Kong must turn Greater Bay Area integration challenges into opportunities / 香港必須將粵港澳大灣區一體化的挑戰轉化為機遇
文章
![]()
The tireless efforts the government is making to reboot Hong Kong’s economy will be futile if the city’s leaders fail to grasp the challenge of integration within the Greater Bay Area and come up with strategies to turn the challenges into opportunities.
A framework agreement for deepening cooperation between Guangdong province, Hong Kong and Macau was signed on July 1, 2017. Almost seven years on, development in the bay area plan is bringing about profound changes to Hongkongers’ lifestyle and the economy.
Soon after the reopening of mainland China early last year, Hongkongers discovered that cities in the Greater Bay Area have made giant strides in urban planning and the service economy. As a result, they have been flocking to the bay area to spend their consumption dollars.
Between March 28 and April 8, which includes the extended Easter weekend and Ching Ming Festival, a staggering 3.6 million Hong Kong residents went north via land control points, compared to about 860,000 mainland residents who visited Hong Kong.
Other cities in the Greater Bay Area have become Hongkongers’ go-to playground in the same way that mainland residents poured into Hong Kong after the Individual Visit Scheme was launched 21 years ago.
The economic impact of this reversed travel pattern being felt across the Greater Bay Area. Last year, Shenzhen authorities announced that “social consumption and retail spending” rose by 7.8 per cent while its gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 6 per cent, exceeding Hong Kong’s and other first-tier cities on the mainland.
In comparison, tourist arrivals from the mainland that have failed to reach pre-pandemic levels, plus weaker spending, as well as the “leakage” of our consumption dollars to the mainland, means our economic recovery crawled to an anaemic 3.2 per cent last year, from a low base in 2022.
In comparison, tourist arrivals from the mainland that have failed to reach pre-pandemic levels, plus weaker spending, as well as the “leakage” of our consumption dollars to the mainland, means our economic recovery crawled to an anaemic 3.2 per cent last year, from a low base in 2022.
The northbound trend is set to increase as more convenient transport links with the mainland develop as part of the Northern Metropolis project, an ambitious plan to develop Hong Kong’s northern districts into a technology hub that will accommodate 2.5 million people. As that happens, more Hongkongers may well choose to live on the mainland, and commute daily to work in Hong Kong, or simply work in other mainland cities.
A fundamental problem with Greater Bay Area development is that it is far from being a single market, even though integration is one of the objectives of the 2017 framework agreement.
Under the “one country, two systems” arrangement, there is no free movement of people, goods, services and data between the mainland and Hong Kong. As separate custom and immigration areas, both sides have instituted controls that make market integration a slow and difficult process.
In the short term, Hong Kong needs to overcome the asymmetry of movement and spending by urging the central authorities to allow residents of more remote mainland cities to visit, as well as approve multiple-visit permits and increase the duty-free allowance for mainland residents returning from Hong Kong.
In the long term, the government must develop a strategy for mainland cities and Hong Kong to complement each other. Officials must work out how to make use of the abundant resources mainland cities have to offer to remedy our shortages.
As more Hongkongers choose to live in nearby mainland cities, why can’t we build our residential care homes in those cities? Cross-border transport is now far more convenient. After all, our residential care homes depend heavily on the import of workers from Guangdong and Guangxi.
Instead of spending billions to reclaim a small area of land, why don’t we buy good-quality housing that’s readily available in nearby mainland cities, to provide more options for those who live in the northern districts? Now is a good time to buy on the cheap.
We should also take more vigorous measures to phase out hindrances for mainland professionals to work in Hong Kong, bring in more talent and import more mainland labour.
Only by leveraging the mainland’s resources, and combining our strengths with theirs, can we turn the process of Greater Bay Area integration into a win-win formula. The government ought to remould Hong Kong into a metropolis like London or New York, with some of its population dispersing into nearby suburbs.
The Hong Kong diaspora on the mainland will make Hong Kong more influential while relieving the pressure of the cost of living in this city. The government needs to think outside the box and move fast.
如果特區政府未能抓住粵港澳大灣區一體化的機遇制定相關策略，即使政府不斷為重振香港經濟而作出努力，將會是徒勞的。
2017年7月1日，廣東省、香港和澳門簽署了深化合作框架協議。快將七年過去，粵港澳大灣區規劃帶來深遠影響，不僅改變了香港人的生活方式，也改變了經濟環境。
去年年初內地開關不久，香港人就發現粵港澳大灣區內城市，無論在城市規劃和服務業方面已迅速進展。結果，香港人踴往大灣區消費了。
今年3月28日至4月8日期間，包括復活節及清明節長假期周末，有多達360萬香港居民通過陸路口岸北上，來香港的內地居民約有86萬人。
這充分反映香港人越來越喜歡離港到鄰近城市消費購物，享受當地便利的生活設施。香港或已無法滿足消費需求，內地城市的競爭力正不斷增強，吸引香港市民。
特區政府和企業如果不想失去這批消費客源，就必須積極參與和引導粵港澳一體化，做好產業對接，協同發展香港與內地市場。
其他粵港澳大灣區城市已經成為香港人新的休閑場所，就像21年前開放個人遊後內地居民湧進香港一樣。
這種反向旅遊模式帶來的經濟影響正蔓延整個大灣區。去年，深圳官方表示“社會消費和零售開支”增長7.8%，GDP增長6%，超過了香港及其他一線內地城市。
相比之下，來港旅遊人數未能恢復疫情前水平，消費力也較弱，加上香港消費流向內地「漏走」，導致我們的經濟復蘇僅從2022年低位爬升到去年的3.2%。如果香港不想失去這批消費客，必須主動參與大灣區一體化，與內地城市合作開拓市場，推動相關產業發展。否則經濟難實現真正復蘇。
餐館與商店的關閉迫使政府發起「香港夜繽紛」活動來刺激本地消費。但這一下滑趨勢很可能會持續，除非香港餐飲與零售服務能達到粵港澳大灣區的質量標准。
如果將所有責任歸咎於我們的服務供應商，值得說的是宏觀經濟力量在這個下滑趨勢中也起到很大作用。香港幣與美元掛鉤，使香港物價對日本、韓國和內地旅客來說極為昂貴。
我們需要借此機會，檢討自身的服務水平與競爭力，並主動學習粵港澳區域內其他城市在人才培訓、科技應用等領域的優良經驗，跟上時代步伐。只有這樣，香港的旅遊業和經濟才有望持續健康發展。
鑒於港幣實力強勁，香港理應貶值。但薪資水平受勞工短缺影響較通貨膨脹更甚的「粘滯性」，使香港很難實現通縮。盡管商業房租有所下降，但香港高薪和房地產成本使其在價格上競爭力近乎無限。
隨著北部都會區計劃落實，香港北區極其宜居的交通網絡將日益完善，這一規劃將該地區打造成可容納250萬人的科技中心。這使更多香港人可能選擇定居內地，每日通勤至港工作，或直接在內地其他城市工作。北上的趨勢將進一步增強。
粵港澳大灣區發展的一個核心問題是，一體化是2017框架協議的目標之一，但區域內市場分化仍很明顯，遠未真正形成單一市場。
根據「一國兩制」，內地與香港在人員、貨物、服務和數據並沒有自由流動。作為單獨的海關和出入境管理區，雙方設立了管理，使市場一體化變成緩慢艱難的過程。
短期來看，香港需要解決來往和消費不對等問題。這可以建議中央允許更多內地較遙遠城市的居民來港，批出更多「一簽多行」通行證，提高港人赴內消費免稅額度。
長遠來看，政府必須制定內地城市與香港互補發展的戰略，官員應研究如何充分利用內地城市豐富資源彌補香港短板。只有內地與香港在人員、貨物與資金流通等各個層面進行全面聯通，粵港澳大灣區市場一體化才能真正實現，使香港經濟獲得更大活力。
隨著香港人選擇定居鄰近內地城市人數增多，我們為什麼不可以在那些城市建設養老院？跨境交通比以往方便得多，而養老院目前已高度依賴從廣東和廣西輸入護理員。
相比花費數千億進行小範圍的填海造地，不如利用鄰近內地城市豐富的高質量房產資源，提供更多選擇給居住在北區的人，現在正是內地房價低廉的好機會。如此一來不僅可以最大限度優化資源配置，還可以緊密結合大灣區內人才與服務資源。離港的年長香港人也可以享受更優質的安老環境，政府值得重視這個可行性高的優化方案。
我們也應采取更積極的措施，逐步消除內地專業人士來港工作的障礙，吸引更多人才，增加從內地輸入勞工。
唯有利用內地資源，結合我們各自的優勢，才能將粵港澳大灣區一體化進程變成雙贏的局面。政府應該把香港打造成類似倫敦或紐約這樣的都會，部分人口分布在周邊郊區。內地的香港人口會使香港的影響力更大，同時緩解生活成本在本地的壓力，政府需要脫離舊式思維，迅速行動。
如果及早把握大灣區機遇，香港定能在新的發展格局中繼續發揮重要作用。
|
|
|
美國對《維護國家安全條例》的反應 / Reactions from the US to the National Security Law for Hong Kong
文章
![]()
自《維護國家安全條例》於3月19日獲立法會全票通過後，社會上不少人士都關注美國政府會否採取大規模制裁措施，制裁有關官員及議員。
就目前情况而言，美國當局的反應遠較想像中克制。除國務卿布林肯於3月22日發表聲明，對香港的高度自治、民主體制和自由權利表示關注外，華府僅宣布對數名港府官員實施簽證限制，措施力度遠輕於美國2020年就《香港國安法》實施後的制裁。
全國人大常委會2020年6月30日通過《香港國安法》後，美國迅速於7月14日通過《香港自治法》授權美國聯邦政府廣泛制裁實施《香港國安法》的中華人民共和國與香港特別行政區政府官員。時任總統特朗普即時簽署行政命令，引述包括《香港人權與民主法》及《香港自治法》在內的多項法例，宣布制裁多名中央及港府官員。
我認為，華府是次應對如此克制的主要原因是不希望再次損害暫趨穩定的中美關係。去年11月，國家主席習近平與拜登在三藩市會面時達成多項共識，包括兩軍高層恢復恆常溝通及合作加強打擊毒品販運。加上美國近日將有多名內閣級官員訪華，相信華府當局並不樂見兩國關係在此刻因香港問題再生枝節。《維護國家安全條例》是經香港本地自行立法，符合普通法程序，加上內容參考了不少西方國家的國安法例，有理有節，並不存在所謂對公民社會、媒體及異見聲音的壓抑。
最重要的是，與2019年黑暴動亂時相比，香港在美國媒體及政界的關注度已下降。由於黑暴打破了外界對香港社會和平有序的印象，因此受到國際媒體的廣泛關注及報道。受此影響，當時有不少美國國會議員都爭相走訪香港，與暴徒合照，表示支持香港的「民主運動」。但現在西方媒體對香港的報道篇幅已不及從前，《維護國家安全條例》的通過亦未在美國國內引起太大迴響。
除此以外，美國國會現時內部一片混亂，我相信國會議員此刻尚未能分神對香港採取制裁行動。
Since the passage of the National Security Law for Hong Kong by the Legislative Council with unanimous consent on March 19, many in society have been concerned about whether the US government will impose large-scale sanctions or penalties against relevant officials and legislators.
So far, the US response has been much more restrained than imagined. In addition to Secretary of State Blinken's statement on March 22 expressing concerns about Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy, democratic system and freedoms, Washington only announced visa restrictions on a few Hong Kong government officials, with measures far lighter than US sanctions after implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law in 2020.
After the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress passed the Hong Kong National Security Law on June 30, 2020, the US swiftly passed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act on July 14, authorizing wide-ranging sanctions by the US federal government against officials of the People's Republic of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government who implemented the Hong Kong National Security Law. Then-President Trump immediately signed an executive order citing multiple laws including the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act and the Hong Kong Autonomy Act to announce sanctions against several central and Hong Kong government officials.
I believe the key reason for Washington's restraint this time is not wanting to further damage Sino-US relations which have regained some stability. In November last year, President Xi Jinping and Biden reached multiple consensuses in San Francisco, including resumption of regular communication and cooperation between military leaders as well as strengthening joint efforts against drug trafficking. Coupled with upcoming visits to China by several senior US Cabinet officials, it's believed Washington does not welcome further complications in bilateral relations over the Hong Kong issue at this time. The National Security Law for Hong Kong was legislated locally through Hong Kong's own processes according to common law procedures, drawing on many Western countries' national security laws, with sound logic and reason and devoid of so-called suppression of civil society, media and dissenting voices.
Most importantly, Hong Kong now attracts less attention from the US media and political circles compared to the black riots in 2019. The black riots shattered the international impression of Hong Kong as a society of peace and order, receiving widespread international media coverage and reports. Influenced by this, many US Congress members at the time competed to visit Hong Kong and pose for photos with rioters expressing support for Hong Kong's "democratic movement." But now Western media coverage of Hong Kong is less than before, and the passage of the National Security Law for Hong Kong did not stir up major reverberations domestically in the US.
Additionally, the US Congress is currently in disarray, and I believe Congress members do not have the bandwidth at this time to take sanctions action against Hong Kong.
|
|
|
特朗普支持TikTok的真相 / The True Story Behind Trump's Support for TikTok
文章
![]()
近年來，隨着內地資訊科技行業發展步伐加快，美國為首的西方國家開始臆想中國會利用網絡平台進行情報收集活動。由字節跳動公司創辦並營運的 TikTok 就被美國政府指控，向中國政府提供用戶的個人信息，危害美國的國家安全。
TikTok在美國深受年輕一代的歡迎。在2017 年5 月進入海外市場後，僅以1年5 個月的時間就成為美國月度下載量及安裝量最高的手機應用程式。然而，公司業務擴張的驚人速度引來了美國政府的猜忌。
2019 年末，美國海軍以TikTok 應用構成網路安全威脅為由，禁止在政府的行動裝置上使用TikTok；美國陸軍則在2020 年初加入抵制TikTok 的行列。當時，特朗普政府曾嘗試透過行政命令，全面封殺TikTok，奈何有關命令最終被法院推翻。
近日，美國眾議院通過一項法案要求字節跳動公司在6 個月內剝離旗下短片分享平台TikTok，否則將在全國範圍內禁用TikTok。總統拜登已表明，假若法案獲兩院通過，他會簽署並頒布落實。
匪夷所思的是，此前一直支持封殺 TikTok 的特朗普卻改變立場，反對禁用TikTok。據美國媒體報道，特朗普「轉軚」的原因有二。第一，他認為假若法案通過，facebook 可能會借機吞併TikTok，從中獲利。特朗普堅信 facebook 母公司Meta 的行政總裁朱克伯格在2020 年大選中協助拜登贏得選舉，因此對其懷有私怨，不希望他因此獲益。
但更重要的原因是，共和黨金主傑夫．亞斯（Jeff Yass）旗下一間公司現時擁有字節跳動15% 股份，市場估值約400 億美元。由於亞斯在本屆大選中向特朗普提供了巨額的財政援助，促使特朗普的立場出現重大轉變。
In recent years, as China's information technology industry development pace accelerates, Western countries led by the United States began conjecturing that China would use online platforms for intelligence collection activities. TikTok, created and operated by ByteDance, has been accused by the US government of providing users' personal information to the Chinese government, posing a threat to US national security.
TikTok is hugely popular among young people in the US. After entering overseas markets in May 2017, it became the mobile app with the highest monthly downloads and installations in the US in just one year and five months. However, the company's astonishing business expansion speed aroused suspicion from the US government.
In late 2019, the US Navy banned the use of TikTok on government mobile devices, citing security risks posed by the app. The US Army also joined the boycott of TikTok in early 2020. At the time, the Trump administration attempted to completely ban TikTok through executive orders, but the relevant orders were ultimately overturned by the courts.
Recently, the US House of Representatives passed a bill requiring ByteDance to divest its short video sharing platform TikTok within six months, or TikTok will be banned nationwide in the US. President Biden has indicated that he will sign and enforce it if the bill passes both chambers.
Strangely, Trump, who had long supported banning TikTok, changed his stance to oppose banning it. According to US media reports, Trump "changed course" for two reasons. First, he believes if the bill passes, Facebook may take advantage to acquire TikTok and profit from it. Trump firmly believes Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg assisted Biden in winning the 2020 election, so he harbors personal resentment and does not want him to benefit from this.
But the more important reason is that a company owned by Republican megadonor Jeff Yass currently holds 15% of ByteDance shares worth an estimated $40 billion in market value. Given Yass' huge financial support for Trump in this election, it prompted a major shift in Trump's position.
|
|
The tireless efforts the government is making to reboot Hong Kong’s economy will be futile if the city’s leaders fail to grasp the challenge of integration within the Greater Bay Area and come up with strategies to turn the challenges into opportunities.
A framework agreement for deepening cooperation between Guangdong province, Hong Kong and Macau was signed on July 1, 2017. Almost seven years on, development in the bay area plan is bringing about profound changes to Hongkongers’ lifestyle and the economy.
Soon after the reopening of mainland China early last year, Hongkongers discovered that cities in the Greater Bay Area have made giant strides in urban planning and the service economy. As a result, they have been flocking to the bay area to spend their consumption dollars.
Between March 28 and April 8, which includes the extended Easter weekend and Ching Ming Festival, a staggering 3.6 million Hong Kong residents went north via land control points, compared to about 860,000 mainland residents who visited Hong Kong.
Other cities in the Greater Bay Area have become Hongkongers’ go-to playground in the same way that mainland residents poured into Hong Kong after the Individual Visit Scheme was launched 21 years ago.
The economic impact of this reversed travel pattern being felt across the Greater Bay Area. Last year, Shenzhen authorities announced that “social consumption and retail spending” rose by 7.8 per cent while its gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 6 per cent, exceeding Hong Kong’s and other first-tier cities on the mainland.
In comparison, tourist arrivals from the mainland that have failed to reach pre-pandemic levels, plus weaker spending, as well as the “leakage” of our consumption dollars to the mainland, means our economic recovery crawled to an anaemic 3.2 per cent last year, from a low base in 2022.
In comparison, tourist arrivals from the mainland that have failed to reach pre-pandemic levels, plus weaker spending, as well as the “leakage” of our consumption dollars to the mainland, means our economic recovery crawled to an anaemic 3.2 per cent last year, from a low base in 2022.
The northbound trend is set to increase as more convenient transport links with the mainland develop as part of the Northern Metropolis project, an ambitious plan to develop Hong Kong’s northern districts into a technology hub that will accommodate 2.5 million people. As that happens, more Hongkongers may well choose to live on the mainland, and commute daily to work in Hong Kong, or simply work in other mainland cities.
A fundamental problem with Greater Bay Area development is that it is far from being a single market, even though integration is one of the objectives of the 2017 framework agreement.
Under the “one country, two systems” arrangement, there is no free movement of people, goods, services and data between the mainland and Hong Kong. As separate custom and immigration areas, both sides have instituted controls that make market integration a slow and difficult process.
In the short term, Hong Kong needs to overcome the asymmetry of movement and spending by urging the central authorities to allow residents of more remote mainland cities to visit, as well as approve multiple-visit permits and increase the duty-free allowance for mainland residents returning from Hong Kong.
In the long term, the government must develop a strategy for mainland cities and Hong Kong to complement each other. Officials must work out how to make use of the abundant resources mainland cities have to offer to remedy our shortages.
As more Hongkongers choose to live in nearby mainland cities, why can’t we build our residential care homes in those cities? Cross-border transport is now far more convenient. After all, our residential care homes depend heavily on the import of workers from Guangdong and Guangxi.
Instead of spending billions to reclaim a small area of land, why don’t we buy good-quality housing that’s readily available in nearby mainland cities, to provide more options for those who live in the northern districts? Now is a good time to buy on the cheap.
We should also take more vigorous measures to phase out hindrances for mainland professionals to work in Hong Kong, bring in more talent and import more mainland labour.
Only by leveraging the mainland’s resources, and combining our strengths with theirs, can we turn the process of Greater Bay Area integration into a win-win formula. The government ought to remould Hong Kong into a metropolis like London or New York, with some of its population dispersing into nearby suburbs.
The Hong Kong diaspora on the mainland will make Hong Kong more influential while relieving the pressure of the cost of living in this city. The government needs to think outside the box and move fast.
如果特區政府未能抓住粵港澳大灣區一體化的機遇制定相關策略，即使政府不斷為重振香港經濟而作出努力，將會是徒勞的。
2017年7月1日，廣東省、香港和澳門簽署了深化合作框架協議。快將七年過去，粵港澳大灣區規劃帶來深遠影響，不僅改變了香港人的生活方式，也改變了經濟環境。
去年年初內地開關不久，香港人就發現粵港澳大灣區內城市，無論在城市規劃和服務業方面已迅速進展。結果，香港人踴往大灣區消費了。
今年3月28日至4月8日期間，包括復活節及清明節長假期周末，有多達360萬香港居民通過陸路口岸北上，來香港的內地居民約有86萬人。
這充分反映香港人越來越喜歡離港到鄰近城市消費購物，享受當地便利的生活設施。香港或已無法滿足消費需求，內地城市的競爭力正不斷增強，吸引香港市民。
特區政府和企業如果不想失去這批消費客源，就必須積極參與和引導粵港澳一體化，做好產業對接，協同發展香港與內地市場。
其他粵港澳大灣區城市已經成為香港人新的休閑場所，就像21年前開放個人遊後內地居民湧進香港一樣。
這種反向旅遊模式帶來的經濟影響正蔓延整個大灣區。去年，深圳官方表示“社會消費和零售開支”增長7.8%，GDP增長6%，超過了香港及其他一線內地城市。
相比之下，來港旅遊人數未能恢復疫情前水平，消費力也較弱，加上香港消費流向內地「漏走」，導致我們的經濟復蘇僅從2022年低位爬升到去年的3.2%。如果香港不想失去這批消費客，必須主動參與大灣區一體化，與內地城市合作開拓市場，推動相關產業發展。否則經濟難實現真正復蘇。
餐館與商店的關閉迫使政府發起「香港夜繽紛」活動來刺激本地消費。但這一下滑趨勢很可能會持續，除非香港餐飲與零售服務能達到粵港澳大灣區的質量標准。
如果將所有責任歸咎於我們的服務供應商，值得說的是宏觀經濟力量在這個下滑趨勢中也起到很大作用。香港幣與美元掛鉤，使香港物價對日本、韓國和內地旅客來說極為昂貴。
我們需要借此機會，檢討自身的服務水平與競爭力，並主動學習粵港澳區域內其他城市在人才培訓、科技應用等領域的優良經驗，跟上時代步伐。只有這樣，香港的旅遊業和經濟才有望持續健康發展。
鑒於港幣實力強勁，香港理應貶值。但薪資水平受勞工短缺影響較通貨膨脹更甚的「粘滯性」，使香港很難實現通縮。盡管商業房租有所下降，但香港高薪和房地產成本使其在價格上競爭力近乎無限。
隨著北部都會區計劃落實，香港北區極其宜居的交通網絡將日益完善，這一規劃將該地區打造成可容納250萬人的科技中心。這使更多香港人可能選擇定居內地，每日通勤至港工作，或直接在內地其他城市工作。北上的趨勢將進一步增強。
粵港澳大灣區發展的一個核心問題是，一體化是2017框架協議的目標之一，但區域內市場分化仍很明顯，遠未真正形成單一市場。
根據「一國兩制」，內地與香港在人員、貨物、服務和數據並沒有自由流動。作為單獨的海關和出入境管理區，雙方設立了管理，使市場一體化變成緩慢艱難的過程。
短期來看，香港需要解決來往和消費不對等問題。這可以建議中央允許更多內地較遙遠城市的居民來港，批出更多「一簽多行」通行證，提高港人赴內消費免稅額度。
長遠來看，政府必須制定內地城市與香港互補發展的戰略，官員應研究如何充分利用內地城市豐富資源彌補香港短板。只有內地與香港在人員、貨物與資金流通等各個層面進行全面聯通，粵港澳大灣區市場一體化才能真正實現，使香港經濟獲得更大活力。
隨著香港人選擇定居鄰近內地城市人數增多，我們為什麼不可以在那些城市建設養老院？跨境交通比以往方便得多，而養老院目前已高度依賴從廣東和廣西輸入護理員。
相比花費數千億進行小範圍的填海造地，不如利用鄰近內地城市豐富的高質量房產資源，提供更多選擇給居住在北區的人，現在正是內地房價低廉的好機會。如此一來不僅可以最大限度優化資源配置，還可以緊密結合大灣區內人才與服務資源。離港的年長香港人也可以享受更優質的安老環境，政府值得重視這個可行性高的優化方案。
我們也應采取更積極的措施，逐步消除內地專業人士來港工作的障礙，吸引更多人才，增加從內地輸入勞工。
唯有利用內地資源，結合我們各自的優勢，才能將粵港澳大灣區一體化進程變成雙贏的局面。政府應該把香港打造成類似倫敦或紐約這樣的都會，部分人口分布在周邊郊區。內地的香港人口會使香港的影響力更大，同時緩解生活成本在本地的壓力，政府需要脫離舊式思維，迅速行動。
如果及早把握大灣區機遇，香港定能在新的發展格局中繼續發揮重要作用。
自《維護國家安全條例》於3月19日獲立法會全票通過後，社會上不少人士都關注美國政府會否採取大規模制裁措施，制裁有關官員及議員。
就目前情况而言，美國當局的反應遠較想像中克制。除國務卿布林肯於3月22日發表聲明，對香港的高度自治、民主體制和自由權利表示關注外，華府僅宣布對數名港府官員實施簽證限制，措施力度遠輕於美國2020年就《香港國安法》實施後的制裁。
全國人大常委會2020年6月30日通過《香港國安法》後，美國迅速於7月14日通過《香港自治法》授權美國聯邦政府廣泛制裁實施《香港國安法》的中華人民共和國與香港特別行政區政府官員。時任總統特朗普即時簽署行政命令，引述包括《香港人權與民主法》及《香港自治法》在內的多項法例，宣布制裁多名中央及港府官員。
我認為，華府是次應對如此克制的主要原因是不希望再次損害暫趨穩定的中美關係。去年11月，國家主席習近平與拜登在三藩市會面時達成多項共識，包括兩軍高層恢復恆常溝通及合作加強打擊毒品販運。加上美國近日將有多名內閣級官員訪華，相信華府當局並不樂見兩國關係在此刻因香港問題再生枝節。《維護國家安全條例》是經香港本地自行立法，符合普通法程序，加上內容參考了不少西方國家的國安法例，有理有節，並不存在所謂對公民社會、媒體及異見聲音的壓抑。
最重要的是，與2019年黑暴動亂時相比，香港在美國媒體及政界的關注度已下降。由於黑暴打破了外界對香港社會和平有序的印象，因此受到國際媒體的廣泛關注及報道。受此影響，當時有不少美國國會議員都爭相走訪香港，與暴徒合照，表示支持香港的「民主運動」。但現在西方媒體對香港的報道篇幅已不及從前，《維護國家安全條例》的通過亦未在美國國內引起太大迴響。
除此以外，美國國會現時內部一片混亂，我相信國會議員此刻尚未能分神對香港採取制裁行動。
Since the passage of the National Security Law for Hong Kong by the Legislative Council with unanimous consent on March 19, many in society have been concerned about whether the US government will impose large-scale sanctions or penalties against relevant officials and legislators.
So far, the US response has been much more restrained than imagined. In addition to Secretary of State Blinken's statement on March 22 expressing concerns about Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy, democratic system and freedoms, Washington only announced visa restrictions on a few Hong Kong government officials, with measures far lighter than US sanctions after implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law in 2020.
After the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress passed the Hong Kong National Security Law on June 30, 2020, the US swiftly passed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act on July 14, authorizing wide-ranging sanctions by the US federal government against officials of the People's Republic of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government who implemented the Hong Kong National Security Law. Then-President Trump immediately signed an executive order citing multiple laws including the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act and the Hong Kong Autonomy Act to announce sanctions against several central and Hong Kong government officials.
I believe the key reason for Washington's restraint this time is not wanting to further damage Sino-US relations which have regained some stability. In November last year, President Xi Jinping and Biden reached multiple consensuses in San Francisco, including resumption of regular communication and cooperation between military leaders as well as strengthening joint efforts against drug trafficking. Coupled with upcoming visits to China by several senior US Cabinet officials, it's believed Washington does not welcome further complications in bilateral relations over the Hong Kong issue at this time. The National Security Law for Hong Kong was legislated locally through Hong Kong's own processes according to common law procedures, drawing on many Western countries' national security laws, with sound logic and reason and devoid of so-called suppression of civil society, media and dissenting voices.
Most importantly, Hong Kong now attracts less attention from the US media and political circles compared to the black riots in 2019. The black riots shattered the international impression of Hong Kong as a society of peace and order, receiving widespread international media coverage and reports. Influenced by this, many US Congress members at the time competed to visit Hong Kong and pose for photos with rioters expressing support for Hong Kong's "democratic movement." But now Western media coverage of Hong Kong is less than before, and the passage of the National Security Law for Hong Kong did not stir up major reverberations domestically in the US.
Additionally, the US Congress is currently in disarray, and I believe Congress members do not have the bandwidth at this time to take sanctions action against Hong Kong.
近年來，隨着內地資訊科技行業發展步伐加快，美國為首的西方國家開始臆想中國會利用網絡平台進行情報收集活動。由字節跳動公司創辦並營運的 TikTok 就被美國政府指控，向中國政府提供用戶的個人信息，危害美國的國家安全。
TikTok在美國深受年輕一代的歡迎。在2017 年5 月進入海外市場後，僅以1年5 個月的時間就成為美國月度下載量及安裝量最高的手機應用程式。然而，公司業務擴張的驚人速度引來了美國政府的猜忌。
2019 年末，美國海軍以TikTok 應用構成網路安全威脅為由，禁止在政府的行動裝置上使用TikTok；美國陸軍則在2020 年初加入抵制TikTok 的行列。當時，特朗普政府曾嘗試透過行政命令，全面封殺TikTok，奈何有關命令最終被法院推翻。
近日，美國眾議院通過一項法案要求字節跳動公司在6 個月內剝離旗下短片分享平台TikTok，否則將在全國範圍內禁用TikTok。總統拜登已表明，假若法案獲兩院通過，他會簽署並頒布落實。
匪夷所思的是，此前一直支持封殺 TikTok 的特朗普卻改變立場，反對禁用TikTok。據美國媒體報道，特朗普「轉軚」的原因有二。第一，他認為假若法案通過，facebook 可能會借機吞併TikTok，從中獲利。特朗普堅信 facebook 母公司Meta 的行政總裁朱克伯格在2020 年大選中協助拜登贏得選舉，因此對其懷有私怨，不希望他因此獲益。
但更重要的原因是，共和黨金主傑夫．亞斯（Jeff Yass）旗下一間公司現時擁有字節跳動15% 股份，市場估值約400 億美元。由於亞斯在本屆大選中向特朗普提供了巨額的財政援助，促使特朗普的立場出現重大轉變。
In recent years, as China's information technology industry development pace accelerates, Western countries led by the United States began conjecturing that China would use online platforms for intelligence collection activities. TikTok, created and operated by ByteDance, has been accused by the US government of providing users' personal information to the Chinese government, posing a threat to US national security.
TikTok is hugely popular among young people in the US. After entering overseas markets in May 2017, it became the mobile app with the highest monthly downloads and installations in the US in just one year and five months. However, the company's astonishing business expansion speed aroused suspicion from the US government.
In late 2019, the US Navy banned the use of TikTok on government mobile devices, citing security risks posed by the app. The US Army also joined the boycott of TikTok in early 2020. At the time, the Trump administration attempted to completely ban TikTok through executive orders, but the relevant orders were ultimately overturned by the courts.
Recently, the US House of Representatives passed a bill requiring ByteDance to divest its short video sharing platform TikTok within six months, or TikTok will be banned nationwide in the US. President Biden has indicated that he will sign and enforce it if the bill passes both chambers.
Strangely, Trump, who had long supported banning TikTok, changed his stance to oppose banning it. According to US media reports, Trump "changed course" for two reasons. First, he believes if the bill passes, Facebook may take advantage to acquire TikTok and profit from it. Trump firmly believes Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg assisted Biden in winning the 2020 election, so he harbors personal resentment and does not want him to benefit from this.
But the more important reason is that a company owned by Republican megadonor Jeff Yass currently holds 15% of ByteDance shares worth an estimated $40 billion in market value. Given Yass' huge financial support for Trump in this election, it prompted a major shift in Trump's position.
