|
|
The West's attacks on Article 23 legislation reflect its double standards
文章
2024 年 3 月 15 日
![]()
In a decisive move to bolster the national security protection regime in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has taken a significant step forward with the formal gazetting of the Safeguarding National Security Bill on Friday. This legislative proposal, mandated by Article 23 of the Basic Law, swiftly proceeded through its first and second readings in the Legislative Council after its introduction on Friday, signifying the commencement of this crucial legislative work.
The draft bill of this ordinance has taken into consideration the critical opinions of the public collected before and during the consultation period, aligning with the principles and objectives of the legislation. It is believed that this law will effectively prevent, stop and penalize activities that endanger national security while protecting the rights and freedoms of residents. To fulfill its constitutional responsibilities, Hong Kong needs to expedite this legislative process and plug the gaps in national security risks without delay.
Article 23 of the Basic Law clearly states that the HKSAR shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government, or the theft of State secrets. This provision outlines the constitutional duty of Hong Kong to legislate on national security — a responsibility that cannot be shirked. Over the past 26 years, the full potential of this legislation has not been realized. The painful experiences of the 2019-20 unrest and the Hong Kong version of the “color revolution” have highlighted the horrific consequences of the absence of such legislation, which brought grave national security risks and posed significant challenges to the everyday lives of Hong Kong residents. The current HKSAR government’s orderly progress in legislative work, reaching a new milestone, is a development that the majority of Hong Kong residents fervently wish for.
The enactment of national security laws is an international norm. Yet Western politicians like former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten and British Foreign Secretary David Cameron have continually vilified the Article 23 legislation, claiming that it lacks safeguards for human rights and freedoms. However, during the public consultation period, the HKSAR government clearly stated that one of the legislative principles of Article 23 was to respect and protect human rights, and to legally uphold the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents. The draft bill ultimately addresses significant societal concerns, offering defenses based on public interest, respecting individual rights and freedoms, and upholding international human rights covenants, while also possessing punitive, deterrent and preventive qualities to maintain national security, societal stability and a favorable business environment.
In fact, the proposed legislation in Hong Kong is relatively mild compared to foreign statutes. For instance, according to the draft legislation, the highest penalty for treason in Hong Kong is life imprisonment, while in the United States and Singapore, it is the death penalty. Openly declaring the intent to commit treason in Hong Kong carries a maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment, whereas in the United Kingdom and Canada, the punishment is life imprisonment. For espionage, the highest penalty in Hong Kong is 20 years’ imprisonment, while in Australia and the UK, it is life imprisonment, and in the US, it can even attract the death penalty.
Western governments and media outlets have criticized the one-month consultation period for this legislation, calling it short and hasty. Yet, following the Sept 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the US Congress passed the Patriot Act just 45 days after the attacks, with the whole legislative process taking only three days to finish — a law that granted unprecedented powers to law enforcement agencies to safeguard national security. Washington and its allies had no problem with the fact that the US Congress passed the Patriot Act with virtually no debate. Their attacks on the “short” consultation period of the Article 23 legislation reflect the West’s usual double standards.
After the legislation is completed, the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance is expected to complement the National Security Law for Hong Kong seamlessly, equipping the special administrative region with a full set of national security protection mechanisms. Moving forward, Hong Kong society can be fully committed to and focused on boosting socioeconomic development, and improving residents’ well-being in a politically stable environment.
|
2024-25年度財政預算案宣布即日起（3月28日）提高煙草稅至每枝煙8角，即每包20枝的香煙售價提高16元。回看2023-24年度財政預算案，當時預算案建議將煙草稅上調每枝0.6元。
根據世界衞生組織建議，煙草稅應增至75%，方可有效減少煙草使用、並作為鼓勵煙草使用者戒煙的最具成本效益措施。
另一方面，私煙來歷不明，販售者切法逃避政府執法，長期來說必然加重政府醫療及執法等方面的負擔，遑論全面降低整體吸煙率。
因此，若要實現真正的「無煙香港」，特區政府必須正視問題，加強執法。
特區政府資料顯示，截至今年2月28日，海關一共成功偵破560宗私煙相關案件；而控煙酒辦由2021年至今，僅只成功檢控12名派發吸煙產品傳單（涉及13宗個案）的違例者。對於私煙流入本港數量如此猖獗來看，如此成果只是九牛一毛，特區政府必須從更多方面着手，更積極地打擊煙草走私，以有效堵截私煙流入香港。
控煙是長期工作，各政府部門及相關機構必須既有分工又相互配合，共同提高控煙成效。
例如，香港吸煙與健康委員會向公眾進行教育宣傳，讓市民了解煙草的禍害，及就現行控煙措施向特區政府提供意見及倡議；衞生署控煙酒辦公室（控煙辦）則就現行與煙草有關的條例進行本地執法，包括打擊在公共屋邨宣傳或販賣私煙等活動，並與更多機構合作為市民提供戒煙服務；海關則執法打擊煙草走私。
彼此必須分工有序，避免資源及工作重疊，最後還要加強宣傳教育，讓市民特別是下一代了解吸煙的禍害，才能長遠達致「無煙香港」的目標。
立法會近日正全力審議《維護國家安全條例草案》，工作繁重，截稿時，草案委員會已連續加開六天全日會議（3月8日至13日）。審議工作進行得如火如荼，西方傳媒廣泛報導，但是部分傳媒的報導立場或取材則非常偏頗，而且涉及不實信息，接近無中生有，描黑《草案》，詆譭香港 。
例如美國《彭博》（Bloomberg）在3月6日推出「HK says Telegram should be prohibited in Article 23 proposal」及「HK says Signal should be prohibited in Article 23 proposal」兩條標題，律政司司長林定國隨即在同日立法會聯席會議上澄清：「可斬釘截鐵地說絕無任何意圖禁制任何社交媒體」，特區政府亦發聲明讉責，指「錯誤報道產生誤解和恐慌」。《彭博》更新標題為「HK public’s views on Article 23 suggest Telegram ban」及「HK public’s views on Article 23 suggest Signal ban」。
另一個例子是英國《泰晤士報》（The Times）於3月12日刊登題為「Hongkongers to be jailed for keeping old newspapers」的文章，內容直指港人若收藏《蘋果日報》會被監禁。特區政府再發聲明讉責，指「報道極具誤導性，標題也完全錯誤」。
這些西方傳媒具世界性影響力，吹捧新聞自由為核心價值，以嚴謹、公正、公信力強的報導著稱。然而，正正就是這些西方傳媒，時有刊登針對中國和香港的不實報導，累積損害中國和香港的形象。別看輕這些不實新聞標題及報導，即使曇花一現也會構成傷害，可能影響股市樓市，也會影響西方社會對香港的觀感，甚至引起恐慌，後果可以很嚴重。正如新民黨主席葉劉淑儀在3月6日立法會聯席會議指出，上述《彭博》標題一出，她便收到迪拜友人查詢，也收到有人說不讓子女來香港了。
傳媒被譽為社會的「第四權」（The Fourth Estate），本應以最嚴謹、專業、客觀、持平的態度作出報導，然而，當有傳媒機構受到政治因素影响而偏離這些黃金法則，屢屢作出不實、誤導、無中生有的報導，其公信力將大打折扣。
猶幸近期特區政府的反應相當快，能做到快速澄清及反駁，減低負面影響。事實上，在大是大非前，反駁必須「快、靚、正」。特區政府一向尊重傳媒的專業性，惟西方傳媒屢屢作出別有用心、損害香港的不實報導，讓人非常失望。期望特區政府繼續做好反駁工作之餘，也要加強與西方傳媒的溝通，務求使他們作出客觀、持平的報導。
In a decisive move to bolster the national security protection regime in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has taken a significant step forward with the formal gazetting of the Safeguarding National Security Bill on Friday. This legislative proposal, mandated by Article 23 of the Basic Law, swiftly proceeded through its first and second readings in the Legislative Council after its introduction on Friday, signifying the commencement of this crucial legislative work.
The draft bill of this ordinance has taken into consideration the critical opinions of the public collected before and during the consultation period, aligning with the principles and objectives of the legislation. It is believed that this law will effectively prevent, stop and penalize activities that endanger national security while protecting the rights and freedoms of residents. To fulfill its constitutional responsibilities, Hong Kong needs to expedite this legislative process and plug the gaps in national security risks without delay.
Article 23 of the Basic Law clearly states that the HKSAR shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government, or the theft of State secrets. This provision outlines the constitutional duty of Hong Kong to legislate on national security — a responsibility that cannot be shirked. Over the past 26 years, the full potential of this legislation has not been realized. The painful experiences of the 2019-20 unrest and the Hong Kong version of the “color revolution” have highlighted the horrific consequences of the absence of such legislation, which brought grave national security risks and posed significant challenges to the everyday lives of Hong Kong residents. The current HKSAR government’s orderly progress in legislative work, reaching a new milestone, is a development that the majority of Hong Kong residents fervently wish for.
The enactment of national security laws is an international norm. Yet Western politicians like former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten and British Foreign Secretary David Cameron have continually vilified the Article 23 legislation, claiming that it lacks safeguards for human rights and freedoms. However, during the public consultation period, the HKSAR government clearly stated that one of the legislative principles of Article 23 was to respect and protect human rights, and to legally uphold the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents. The draft bill ultimately addresses significant societal concerns, offering defenses based on public interest, respecting individual rights and freedoms, and upholding international human rights covenants, while also possessing punitive, deterrent and preventive qualities to maintain national security, societal stability and a favorable business environment.
In fact, the proposed legislation in Hong Kong is relatively mild compared to foreign statutes. For instance, according to the draft legislation, the highest penalty for treason in Hong Kong is life imprisonment, while in the United States and Singapore, it is the death penalty. Openly declaring the intent to commit treason in Hong Kong carries a maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment, whereas in the United Kingdom and Canada, the punishment is life imprisonment. For espionage, the highest penalty in Hong Kong is 20 years’ imprisonment, while in Australia and the UK, it is life imprisonment, and in the US, it can even attract the death penalty.
Western governments and media outlets have criticized the one-month consultation period for this legislation, calling it short and hasty. Yet, following the Sept 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the US Congress passed the Patriot Act just 45 days after the attacks, with the whole legislative process taking only three days to finish — a law that granted unprecedented powers to law enforcement agencies to safeguard national security. Washington and its allies had no problem with the fact that the US Congress passed the Patriot Act with virtually no debate. Their attacks on the “short” consultation period of the Article 23 legislation reflect the West’s usual double standards.
After the legislation is completed, the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance is expected to complement the National Security Law for Hong Kong seamlessly, equipping the special administrative region with a full set of national security protection mechanisms. Moving forward, Hong Kong society can be fully committed to and focused on boosting socioeconomic development, and improving residents’ well-being in a politically stable environment.
承接上文，社會上有聲音指，Taylor Swift不在香港舉辦世界巡迴演唱會，反映香港沒有足夠吸引力讓國際盛事落戶。我認為上述憂慮低估了香港這個亞洲國際之都的影響力。
事實上，香港每年所舉辦的國際盛事多不勝數，這些活動大多集中於會議展覽及獎勵旅遊（MICE）領域，普羅市民或者較少留意。撇除早前宣布延期的 DiorFall2024時裝展，單是今年上半年，香港就計劃舉辦86場體育賽事、大型展覽、高峰會議等不同類型的盛事。
香港地理位置優越，加上交通方便，會展服務業相當發達，每年都會舉行數以百計的會議展覽。例如每年3月和9月舉辦的香港國際珠寶展及香港珠寶首飾展覽會，都是亞洲區罕見的大型珠寶展覽。後者更是全球最大型的珠寶商貿展覽，今年設有約40個主題攤位，預計吸引超過3000個參展商來港。
除此之外，貿易發展局舉辦的香港玩具展亦是會展業的年度盛事之一。香港的玩具出口商現時主要為海外玩具品牌提供外判生產業務，向來以供應優質玩具見稱。得益於此，香港玩具展每年都吸引上千個參展商自全球各地慕名而來，尋找商機，是亞洲最大規模的玩具展之一。
香港今年亦爭取到多個具影響力的國際級盛事，包括首度來港舉辦的國際級高爾夫球賽LIV Golf以及國際潮流盛事 ComplexCon。
LIVGolf獲沙特阿拉伯主權財富基金贊助，總獎金折合約1.95億港元，是香港史上最高獎金的大賽之一。據報道，過去一周，主辦單位、球手、他們親友以及工作人員等，已預訂超過600間酒店房間，預計對本港酒店餐飲、旅遊業帶來相當高的經濟效益。ComplexCon更是首次在美國以外的地區舉辦，集結超過200名HipHop歌手、潮流藝術家及創作者，預計可吸引超過3萬名旅客來港。
由此可見，香港對盛事主辦商仍然具有相當吸引力，香港亦有能力搞好大型盛事，市民毋須妄自菲薄。
Hong Kong Has Abundant Major Events
Following the previous article, some voices argued that Taylor Swift not holding her world tour concert in Hong Kong reflected the city's insufficient appeal to host international events. I think this concern underestimates Hong Kong's influence as an Asian global city.
In fact, Hong Kong hosts countless international events every year, mostly concentrated in meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions (MICE) sectors, which may receive less attention from the general public. Apart from the previously postponed DiorFall2024 fashion show, just in the first half of this year, Hong Kong has planned 86 sporting events, major exhibitions and conferences of various types.
With its geographical advantage and convenient transportation, Hong Kong's exhibition services industry is highly developed, hosting hundreds of conferences and exhibitions annually. For example, the Hong Kong International Jewellery Show in March and September, and the Hong Kong Jewellery and Jade Show are among Asia's largest jewellery exhibitions. The latter is also the world's largest jewellery trade fair, with around 40 thematic pavilions this year, expected to attract over 3,000 exhibitors.
In addition, Hong Kong Toy Fair organized by the Trade Development Council, is also a major annual event in the exhibition industry. Hong Kong toy exporters currently mainly provide OEM production services to overseas toy brands, known for quality toys. Thanks to this, the Toy Fair attracts thousands of exhibitors from around the world each year seeking business opportunities, being one of the largest toy exhibitions in Asia.
This year Hong Kong has also succeeded in attracting many influential international events, including the debut LIVGolf international elite golf tournament and the international trend event ComplexCon.
Hosted for the first time in a non-US location, ComplexCon is expected to attract over 30,000 visitors to the city, featuring more than 200 hip hop artists, fashion icons and creators.
This shows event organizers still view Hong Kong as highly appealing. The city is capable of hosting large-scale events well. Local residents need not underestimate themselves.
最近，我閱讀了一篇來自中國內地的文章，標題為〈深圳，猛吸香港錢〉。該文章指港人消費習慣轉變，北上消費熱潮成風，更直指港人是「現金奶牛」，文章隨即瘋傳。
從港人願意在深圳消費的習慣看來，香港消費者並不排斥消費，也不是沒錢消費。只是他們認為深圳價廉物美性價比高，於是錢都往深圳花了。此消彼長，這無疑會對本地的餐飲、零售、服務業造成打擊，客流量及銷售額都不如前。
面對這樣的挑戰，本地業界應如何應變以至「應戰」，留住港人的腳步，減少深圳吸走香港消費者的錢？
中央港澳工作辦公室主任、國務院港澳事務辦公室主任夏寶龍，在今年全國兩會召開前與港區人大政協會面，提出「零起點」思維，指香港要重新面對複雜形勢，重新出發。我認為適用於香港的旅遊、餐飲、零售，以至服務等各行各業，意思就是要忘記過去輝煌，由零開始思考目前形勢，找出全新策略，升級轉型，再進攻市場。
各行各業需要重新了解今日港人的消費喜好和變化，思考如何提升整體消費體驗，包括產品或服務的創新性、獨特性、不可替代性，還有優質的客戶服務，讓港人享受留港消費。舉例說，很多食肆、私房菜主打別出心裁的菜式，食物好吃，都會受到港人追捧。
另一點要追求的，是國家主席習主席經常強調的「高質量發展」，包括有效運用創新科技提升業界質量，例如利用大數據，分析及預測消費者的行為喜好，做到產品或服務精準到位。
所謂有危便有機，香港一向懂得靈活變通，既然知道挑戰在哪，我相信特區政府以至各行各業都會找出應變對策，以新的點子，留住港人的心，讓更多港人留港消費，造福本地經濟。
財政司司長陳茂波剛於2月28日宣讀今年度《財政預算案》，提到「預計2023/24年度綜合赤字為1016億元」（第205段），然而，若計及發債725億元，實際綜合赤字應該有1741億元之鉅。
在這樣嚴峻的財政狀況下，特區政府的投資策略顯得特別重要，高效率高回報的投資策略，可改善特區政府的財政狀況。我認為，特區政府是時候積極檢討及改善其一貫投資策略。
特區政府近年設立大量不同用途的基金，主要以種子基金的模式運作，即是不動用本金，靠投資回報所得，來支持該基金的特定用途。這個模式無可厚非，但特區政府就「香港特別行政區政府獎學基金」（下稱「政府獎學基金」）提供的資料，便顯示特區政府就這類種子基金的投資策略有很多問題。
特區政府於2008年設立10億元的「政府獎學基金」，最初是向本港的傑出學生提供「卓越表現獎學金」。期後在2011年、2012年、2013年及2018年，分別獲得四次注資，獎學金的範疇也擴展至「才藝發展獎學金」、「外展體驗獎」、「展毅表現獎」等等。至於今次的注資主角「一帶一路獎學金」，則是於2016年新增的範疇，屬於「特定地區獎學金」旗下。
「政府獎學基金」以種子基金模式運作，即是在不動用本金的原則下，以投資回報來支付各個獎學金項目。補充文件指截至2024年1月下旬，「政府獎學基金」的本金為30億7000萬元，淨盈餘則有1億1000萬元。教育局認為這款項不足以支付未來的各項獎學金金額，於是要求第五度注資，並且要求10億元。
此外，當我查閱這五間投資管理公司的資料時，竟發現當中有四間是美國公司、一間是德國公司，卻沒有一間是香港「本地薑」，這點讓我相當不滿。眾所周知，在地緣政治及美西方資金撤出香港的情況下，本地基金經理經營困難，為甚麼特區政府不聘用本地基金經理？究竟是誰及以甚麼準則決定聘用哪些基金經理？是覺得外國的月亮特別圓？還是看不起「本地薑」？
最後，教育局指「政府獎學基金」的投資回報率以維持在4厘為目標，獲注資10億元後，預計每年可賺取的投資收入約4000萬元，扣除投資管理公司管理費等支出後，便可用作「一帶一路獎學金」新增名額的所需資金。然而，近年的實際回報率平均只是2厘，期間有年份是虧損的。環顧最新的投資市況，若購買特區政府的綠色債券，已可鎖定三年保底息率4.75厘。如果投資一些在港上市、風險低而回報高的公司，回報更高，這是普通市民也懂的投資常識。那麼，為甚麼還要把那麼細金額的本金，分拆給五間投資公司管理，付上高昂的管理費，換來再注資10億元的要求？還有，那筆本金當中，有多少是存於香港金融管理局賺取利息的？回報如何？
對於上述這些問題，教育局通通未能回答。不過，為免發出立法會議員不支持「一帶一路」的錯誤信息，會議當日我有舉手支持撥款。但是作為立法會議員，我必定會繼續跟進。
立法會已連續三天加開全日會議，審議《國家安全條例草案》，今天也會繼續。審議工作繁重，我和新民黨主席葉劉淑儀，以及其他立法會議員，都會繼續秉持嚴謹的態度，盡責履職，審議條文。
對於有意見指今次為《基本法》第23條立法過快過急，我並不認同。反之，我們今天走到審議這一步，經歷了漫長的歲月，一點也不容易。
眾所周知，為《基本法》第23條自行立法，是香港特別行政區的憲制責任，本應及早完成，奈何2003年時推動立法未果，這是每一位香港人都知道的事，也是香港歷史的一部分。從2003年到2024年，社會蘊釀了二十一年，期間經歷了2014年違法佔中、2019年黑暴等動盪，社會普遍明白為國家安全立法的重要性，我們終於邁出立法的歷史性一步，怎麼會是過快。
再者，今次立法，保安局和律政司團隊都做了大量工作，不論是早前的諮詢文件，抑或目前的條例草案，內容詳盡清晰，列出各項罪類，涵蓋了方方面面。立法會審議條例的工作是嚴格根據程序進行，委員會主席廖長江議員讓會議有序有效率地進行，十分稱職。
連日會議上，議員針對條例內容提問，官員清晰回應，沒有昔日無謂的糾纏和為反而反的爭拗，交流深入而理性，過程自然流暢有序又有效率。
最後，相對於西方國家的做法，例如美國在2001年「9．11」事故後，隨即在10月2日提出《美國愛國者法案》，同月24日通過眾議院審議，一天後參議院通過法案，再一天後即10月26日總統便簽署生效，全國程只是二十五天，可見當社會認為立法有逼切性時，便能減省爭拗，有效率地完成。
在全國兩會的焦點議題中，2024年科技金融被各界代表熱烈討論，反映出在全球經濟版圖中，科技金融與金融科技的重要性日漸突出。兩者作為金融與科技交匯的產物，既在全球金融市場改革與升級過程中扮演著核心推動力，又在促進實體經濟邁向高質量發展的道路上發揮了無可比擬的作用。
科技金融與金融科技分別承擔著不同的功能與使命。科技金融著重於通過金融工具和策略扶持科技創新活動，從源頭資金支持科技成果的研發與產業化進程。而金融科技更關注運用大數據、雲計算、人工智能等先進技術對傳統金融業務進行深度革新，從而提供更便捷、高效且普惠的金融服務，其影響範圍遍及支付結算、風險管理、智能投顧等多個金融子領域。
兩會代表在會上強調科技金融與金融科技的深度融合，及其對中國科技創新和成果轉化的長遠影響。他們指出，國家始終堅持創新驅動發展戰略，尤其在《十四五》規劃中突顯科技金融與金融科技的戰略意義，出台系列政策以引導金融資源高效流入科技創新，加速科技成果轉換為現實生產力。同時通過深化金融體制變革，構建有助於科技創新的金融服務生態，實現了金融與科技之間的雙向賦能。
鑒於中國廣闊的市場規模和豐富的應用場景，尤其是作為全球最大互聯網市場所擁有的龐大用戶群和海量數據資源，為科技創新和金融服務創新提供了獨特的優勢。在消費金融、供應鏈金融以及科技成果轉化等金融服務領域，中國都顯現出了巨大的發展潛力。
中國在5G、人工智能、區塊鏈等前沿技術上的領先地位，不僅提高了本國金融服務業的技術水平和運作效率，還為在全球金融市場競爭中建立了堅實的技術屏障。據《金融科技行業2023年專利分析白皮書》、《全球獨角獸趨勢報告》等數據顯示，中國在金融科技專利申請量和獨角獸企業數量等方面表現卓越，體現出科技金融與金融科技領域創新活動活躍且前景廣闊。
兩會熱議中，科技金融與金融科技的交融被視為中國金融體系轉型升級、服務科技創新的關鍵一環。在政策指導、市場拓展和技術驅動三大支柱的支撐下，中國在這個領域確立了清晰的定位，並展示了前所未有的發展潛力與競爭優勢。
香港作為國際金融中心，在全球科技融合過程中扮演了關鍵角色。我們憑藉獨特的地理優勢聯通內地與國際市場，吸引全球資本投入科技創新和金融改革。高效的金融基礎設施、嚴格監管框架以及對科技創新的開放態度，為金融科技與科技金融的創新發展提供了穩固的基礎。香港在金融科技監管沙盒實踐、虛擬資產牌照發放等方面的成績，證明了其積極推進二者融合的決心與成效。
在粵港澳大灣區建設背景之下，香港有望依託其金融樞紐地位，進一步加強與灣區內其他城市的合作，共享資源、互聯互通，共同挖掘科技金融的巨大潛力，有力推動區域內乃至全球金融科技產業的快速發展。
中國將在科技金融與金融科技的深度融合道路上繼續挖掘和發揮自身優勢，尋求更高的發展層次。香港則能強化其橋頭堡角色，攜手內地與國際社會，共同推動科技金融與金融科技在未來階段取得更大突破，以實現全球金融發展的公平、包容與可持續，確保科技創新與金融支持的緊密銜接，有力推動中國經濟高質量發展。
Notwithstanding that the general sentiment among Hong Kong residents is one of strong support for the prompt completion of the proposed Article 23 legislation, as evidenced by the just-concluded public consultation, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron and the United States State Department recently issued statements denigrating the proposed legislation.
What they have done is beyond comprehension as every nation has the right and duty to safeguard its national security, and enacting necessary laws to safeguard national security is a common international practice. This is particularly significant in light of the lessons learned from the 2019-20 unrest, and Hong Kong residents clearly understand the importance of this proposed legislation. Therefore, attempts by foreign powers to tarnish this process are futile.
Following the 2019 ant-extradition campaign, the central government promulgated the National Security Law for Hong Kong, which swiftly restored peace and order in the city. However, this law addresses only a handful of specific offenses: secession, subversion of State power, terrorist activities, and collusion with foreign or external forces to endanger national security. The Article 23 legislation encompasses a broader range of offenses, including treason, sedition, theft of State secrets, and establishing ties with foreign political organizations.
As demonstrated by the result of the public consultation, there is a broad consensus among residents on the need for the proposed legislation. During the monthlong consultation process, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government received 13,147 submissions, of which 12,969 (98.65 percent) were in support of the proposed legislation, while only 93 (0.71 percent) were opposed. Notably, more than 10 of these opposing submissions came from anti-China organizations abroad or individuals who have fled the country, suggesting that those who are against the legislation are those with a guilty conscience.
Nevertheless, Western politicians have ignored this overwhelming public opinion supporting the proposed legislation and continue to cast Hong Kong in a negative light over the Article 23 legislation. But both Cameron and the US State Department’s allegations against the proposed legislation are totally unfounded. The HKSAR government has repeatedly stated before and during the public consultation that one of the guiding principles of Article 23 legislation is to respect and protect human rights, ensuring the lawful rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents. The legislation will target with precision those acts that endanger national security. Law-abiding residents and businesses need not worry about being inadvertently ensnared by the law.
That is why not only local chambers of commerce have expressed their support for the proposed Article 23 legislation, believing it will help create a more stable business environment, but also leaders of foreign chambers of commerce in Hong Kong, who have said that they see no uncertainties or negative factors arising from the legislation.
The legal basis for China to govern the HKSAR is the Constitution of China and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR, not the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which Cameron cited in his statement on the proposed legislation. After China resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong on July 1, 1997, Britain no longer had any jurisdiction, or right of supervision, over Hong Kong.
Western politicians and media, mired in their prejudice against China and its HKSAR, have interpreted the proposed Article 23 legislation through a “gray filter”, and vilified it in every way they could imagine. As the legislative process proceeded with the Safeguarding National Security Bill having been tabled to the Legislative Council for deliberation today, the smear campaign could only intensify. But their endeavors to derail the legislative process will prove to be futile, as the HKSAR government’s determination to enact the legislation sooner rather than later is unanswerable.
旅客的消費模式在疫後出現顯著改變，青睞着重體驗的沉浸式旅遊，購物消費則退而其次，過往以消費購物為主的香港旅遊業受到一定影響。有鑑於此，特區政府正推動發展文化、藝術及體育相結合的盛事經濟，希望藉此帶旺旅遊業，振興本地市道。
但坊間有意見認為，特區政府在爭取大型盛事來港舉辦方面，面對不少困難。有聲音指，美國樂壇天后Taylor Swift的時代巡迴演唱會（The Eras Tour）沒有選擇香港而將新加坡定作東南亞唯一目的地，或反映香港在主辦團體當中缺乏吸引力，導致天后決定「捨港取星」。
然而，上述的觀點相當錯誤。事實是，特區政府根本沒有邀請Taylor Swift來港舉辦演唱會。據傳媒報道， Taylor Swift團隊之所以答應新加坡政府將星城定為東南亞唯一一站，除因為對方斥至少200萬至300萬美元巨資補貼外，主要是看中新加坡國家體育場這一個可容納5.5萬名觀眾的戶外表演場地。
香港現時未有一個戶外表演場地能夠媲美新加坡國家體育場，加上特區政府重視審慎理財，不會仿效新加坡花費大量金錢補貼。雖然特區政府素有如「M」品牌計劃及「文化藝術盛事基金」等措施支援各項文化藝術及體育盛事在香港舉行，但我認為香港過往一直由市場驅動，牽頭籌辦盛事活動的方針正確，特區政府毋須將所有工作「攬上身」。再者，考慮到庫房已連續5年「見紅」，耗費數以千萬計公帑資助歌星舉行演唱會的做法更需三思。
Taylor Swift不來舉辦演唱會，固然可惜，但這並不意味香港缺乏舉辦大型盛事的能力。相反，其實每年也有不同的國際盛事在港舉辦，下期將展開詳述。
A Concert is Not Necessary for Event-driven Economy
The consumption patterns of visitors have undergone significant changes post-pandemic, with an increasing preference for immersive experience-focused tourism over shopping. This has impacted Hong Kong's tourism industry which previously relied heavily on shopping consumption. In view of this, the HKSAR government is promoting the development of an event-driven economy integrating culture, arts and sports, hoping to boost tourism and stimulate the local market through this.
However, some opinions believe the HKSAR government faces many difficulties in attracting large-scale events to Hong Kong. Some commented that pop diva Taylor Swift's The Eras Tour not choosing Hong Kong and only making Singapore the sole Southeast Asian destination could reflect Hong Kong's lack of attractiveness among event organizers, leading to her decision to "ditch Hong Kong for Singapore".
However, the above views are quite mistaken. In fact, the HKSAR government had not invited Taylor Swift to hold a concert in Hong Kong. According to media reports, Taylor Swift's camp agreed to make Singapore the only Southeast Asian stop mainly because the local government invested at least $2-3 million in subsidies, and also saw the potential of the National Stadium which can accommodate 55,000 audience for outdoor performances.
Currently Hong Kong does not have an outdoor venue that can match the National Stadium in Singapore. Considering the HKSAR government's prudent fiscal stance, it would not follow Singapore's example of spending huge sums subsidizing events. While the government has support measures like the "M+ Programme" and "Arts and Culture Events Fund" to support cultural, arts and sports events in Hong Kong, I believe Hong Kong's past market-driven approach of facilitating events is correct, and the government need not take on all responsibilities. Moreover, it's prudent not to lavishly subsidize star concerts with tens of millions of public funding, given five consecutive annual deficits.
Taylor Swift not holding a concert here is understandably regrettable, but it does not mean Hong Kong lacks ability to host major events. In fact, different international events are held in Hong Kong every year, which will be detailed in the next article.