¬d¬Ý§¹¾ãª©¥»: English Articles Everyday

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Street markets a valuable part of our cultural heritage



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   One test of a great city is how well it preserves what is worth keeping. This is especially so in Hong Kong, where the issue of development versus preservation is complicated by lack of space. As a result there is often little room for sentiment such as preservation of important strands of our cultural heritage.
The buzz concepts are improved traffic flow, high-rise makeovers of old neighbourhoods such as Lee Tung Street in Wan Chai, fondly known to many as Wedding Card Street, and modern tourist attractions such as the Ngong Ping 360 cable car and Disneyland.


Traditional tourist attractions such as street markets do not loom large in the vision of government planners. Dai pai dongs are dying out because licences for the food stalls can only be passed on to spouses. The 70-year-old Wan Chai street market, the largest and oldest on Hong Kong Island, is the latest example of cultural heritage under threat. Since hawkers were driven out of Wan Chai Road 30 years ago to improve traffic flow, the market has thrived in the back streets, a way of life to locals and a magnet for tourists.

Now it is under pressure again, this time from urban renewal. Earlier this year, the government backed down from a plan to move all the 150-odd stalls indoors beneath a new residential development by China Estates Holdings. The move was aimed at improving traffic flow after the new development opens. But it was opposed by the hawkers because it would have robbed the market of its traditional open-air colour and character.

The government still insists that roughly half the market must go, and is trying to find alternative outdoor sites for 86 stallholders. Local residents and shopkeepers have opposed the building of new stalls within the remainder of the market.

It is ironic that one reason for the forced move is to improve traffic flow - as it was 30 years ago - and that another is to improve the area's "environmental hygiene". Some may wonder which detracts more from environmental hygiene - increased traffic polluting the air or local residents' perception of the market as visual "pollution" of the neighbourhood.

The emasculation of the Wan Chai market amounts to sanitisation of the streetscape at the expense of an important example of the city's cultural heritage. Visitors to the city will not be the only losers. Hawkers in densely populated urban areas supply a service to low- income groups for which there is no comparable alternative.

We have a more serious environmental hygiene problem than street markets - air pollution, which poses serious public health issues and casts a shadow over economic development. Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen will earn the gratitude of all if he uses his policy address to outline a more comprehensive plan for improving air quality. That would be more meaningful than cracking down on popular street markets.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZRVRO9CRE.html[/url]

Thursday, September 21, 2006

US TREASURY SECRETARY
Mr Paulson goes to China


DON EVANS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


This week, Henry Paulson is making his first trip to China as US treasury secretary. But this is hardly his first visit to the mainland. Mr Paulson has made more than 70 visits  to the country over the past three decades.
When US President George W. Bush nominated him as treasury secretary, he gained not only one of Wall Street's most respected leaders, but one of the world's foremost experts on China.

Over the years, Mr Paulson has cultivated relationships with Chinese leaders that are second to none. They know him as someone they can do business with, and someone they trust to speak with them frankly. China has emerged as the world's fastest-growing economy and one of America's most important trading partners: Mr Paulson's expertise could not have come on the scene at a better time.

During his trip, he will emphasise the critical importance of continued reform and modernisation of the mainland's financial sector. Such reform would promote the country's sustainable growth over the long term, expanding its economic output by as much as 17 per cent - according to a McKinsey and Company survey. It is also a prerequisite to progress on the big issues that define America's economic relationship with China.

The first of these is currency reform. As Mr Paulson made clear in his confirmation hearing, in order to remove capital controls and move to a more freely floating exchange rate determined by market forces, China must have a modern, fully functioning, market-based financial system.

The second key issue is the trade deficit. Among the reasons that our trade deficit with China exists and continues to grow is because Chinese consumers save too much. A better consumer-credit system would unleash unmobilised savings by allowing mainland consumers to use loans to buy many of the big-ticket items for which they now must save.

A stronger consumer market in the mainland would lead to a greater demand for imports from the United States, and a lower trade deficit.

The third concern is a level playing field for American companies operating in the mainland. Too much of China's capital continues to flow to inefficient, nonproductive state enterprises rather than to the most productive borrowers. Further opening of the country's financial system to foreign institutions would inject world-class expertise and know-how regarding credit analysis, risk management and internal controls into China's financial markets. This would transform its economy, putting foreign companies on a fairer, market-oriented, competitive footing with local enterprises.

I recently travelled to Beijing to meet top business and government leaders. We discussed many of the same issues that will be on Mr Paulson's agenda: the critical importance of open commercial banking, capital, and insurance markets to promoting the consumption-led economic growth that China's leaders seek; the need for China to continue to meet its obligations under the World Trade Organisation; and the importance of further steps towards currency reform.

I know, from my own experience, that Chinese financial leaders understand that allowing greater reliance on market principles is in the best interest of the country's long-term growth, job creation and general well-being of its citizens.

Mr Paulson's task will be to continue to urge them to transform that insight into action.

The US and China together accounted for half of the world's economic growth over the past four years. Further, China is the fastest-growing market for US exports and the second largest source for American imports.

The fortunes of the two countries are undeniably linked.

Don Evans is former US commerce secretary and chief executive officer of the Financial Services Forum.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZUPZO9CRE.html[/url]

:reading:

Friday, September 22, 2006

UNITED NATIONS MANDATES
Big talk, little commitment


ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The United Nations peacekeeping operations under way in Lebanon offer a big opportunity for the UN to demonstrate its relevance and impact on the world stage. If only those member states who claim to be the UN's biggest supporters would put their money where their mouths are.
Many world leaders, particularly those in Europe, decry the Bush administration's undermining of the UN, especially since 2003. Leaders in France expressed outrage when the US sidestepped the UN and invaded Iraq without the international community's blessing. Yet they stunned the world in August when they backed down from their promise to send 2,000 peacekeepers to intervene in southern Lebanon, and instead committed only 200.


Fortunately, France is reconsidering, while Germany will provide limited naval assistance and Italy has stepped up to contribute 3,000 peacekeepers. But Europe's response, like the US response in other cases, highlights a critical issue for all supporters of the UN and international institutions more generally. If we cannot do what it takes to make them more effective, we will increasingly find that nations will bypass them altogether.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire. It thus set the stage for UN officials to set out the rules of engagement for its peacekeepers. The rules dictate when, and under what circumstances, UN troops can fire their weapons to defend themselves. But, as the current UN mission in Lebanon well knows, defending yourself is not the same as preventing hostile fire in the first place.

But the need for rules of engagement is only the symptom of a deeper problem. The real issue is a yawning gap between paper and practice. In the heat of an international crisis, the security council passes resolutions to great public fanfare, establishing an official UN "mandate". But then the secretary-general is left, resolution in hand, to ask member states for the actual, tangible resources necessary to implement the action that has been commanded. In the overwhelming majority of cases, those resources fall far short of what is required to successfully intervene in a crisis.

A UN mandate review this year found that member states adopt hundreds of mandates each year - conferring "additional responsibilities with neither corresponding funds nor guidance" on how resources should be used. In American domestic politics, such commands from the US Congress to states are known as "unfunded mandates" - ordering results without providing the resources necessary to achieve them. It's political theatre: big headlines, small results. The mandate gap reflects the way the world has done business with the UN for decades: big promises, small pay-outs, and much scapegoating if the UN then fails.

The UN provides the mechanism for a global response, but it does not exist separately from its member states. It is up to those members to provide both the necessary will and the required resources. Otherwise, the UN is nothing more than a handy mechanism for outsourcing political blame.

Our commitment to bring peace to the Middle East, or Darfur, or Kosovo or Haiti, is not measured by our words, but by our wallets. The world gets what it pays for.

The author is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. Copyright: Project Syndicate



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZX8LM9CRE.html[/url]

:reading:

[quote]­ì©«¥Ñ [i]¤j¥Ð­^©ú[/i] ©ó 2006-9-22 08:04 µoªí
Friday, September 22, 2006

UNITED NATIONS MANDATES
Big talk, little commitment

ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER
   
Prev. Story | Next Story

----------------------------------------------

... The real issue is a yawning gap between paper and practice. In the heat of an international crisis, the security council passes resolutions to great public fanfare, establishing an official UN "mandate". But then the secretary-general is left, resolution in hand, to ask member states for the actual, tangible resources necessary to implement the action that has been commanded. In the overwhelming majority of cases, those resources fall far short of what is required to successfully intervene in a crisis ... [/quote]

[¥i¼¦®a·AÉNª¤ !]

Thanks a lot, Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ...  :bow::bow:

I've been asked who writes for Mr. Bush's speeches. Do you have any information on this matter. ?  :wondering::wondering:

Looking forward to viewing your article for this week ... :reading::reading:

Monday, September 25, 2006

OUT OF THE BOX
Off to a miserable start


KITTY POON
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   September is the month of stress. Surveys indicated that nearly 78 per cent of Hong Kong teachers feel stressed by their overwhelming workloads at the start of the school year. This month is also a time of immense anxiety for parents - especially those whose children must make the transition from kindergarten to primary school one year from now.
A friend of mine is a mother of two, and her older daughter will be eligible to study in a primary school next year. But the admission process begins this month, and the whole family has been mobilised to achieve one single goal - to send their lovely girl to a reputable primary school.


At the core of this daunting task is the application letter. To impress the prospective school, the parents have decided to write it in English, although that means hiring a professional editor.

Also central to the application is the emphasis on the personality of the young lady. Hence, a great number of relatives are being enlisted to describe her amiable characteristics in their reference letters.

Knowing that extracurricular activities are one of the criteria in the selection process, some parents enrol their children in various private lessons, such as drawing, singing, kung fu, and ballet, to build an impressive record.

The application exercise also involves an interview at the prospective school. It's widely known that schools are likely to ask about the patterns of family life. In order to demonstrate to the school that they take a keen interest in expanding their children's cultural and other experiences, parents have to ingeniously "engineer" family outings. This often involves taking their children on guided tours around Hong Kong, or joining tours to the mainland and Taiwan.

Some parents, especially those with demanding jobs, can't take all these measures. For them, the remedy may lie in tutorials to train their youngsters in giving model answers during school interviews.

It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that enrolling your child in a reputable primary school in Hong Kong is equivalent to getting a top job with a Wall Street firm.

For many families, this admission exercise can take a heavy toll on finances - especially for those with modest incomes. It also places undue pressure on working parents, who have to invest a lot of time and energy. Further, it makes a mockery of the city's education system, which gives little thought to the value of personal growth.

It would be difficult to fully understand the true feelings of the children being put through this ludicrous enrolment process. But it was reported that more than 300 calls from disturbed students have been received by the Federation of Youth Group so far this month.

It's hard to imagine that children could go on to enjoy - and feel motivated in - their years in school, after such a terrifying experience at the beginning of their school life.

This corrosion of the genuine interest in learning will have significant implications for the personal development of our young children.

It will also eventually undermine their creativity, thus weakening the overall vibrancy of Hong Kong in the long run.

Kitty Poon, a research fellow at the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong, is a part-time member of the government's Central Policy Unit.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ0X9P9CRE.html[/url]

Thank you Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú,

It is indeed a serious problem to many families in HK. I just hope that there will be a solution to it in the near future .... :help::help::help:

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

MISGUIDED ENERGY POLICY
An escape from Bush's future


JEFFREY SACHS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


It always comes back to oil. The continuing misguided interventions in the Middle East by the United States and Britain have their roots deep in the Arabian sand. Ever since Winston Churchill led the conversion of Britain's navy from coal to oil at the start of the last century, the western powers have meddled incessantly in the affairs of Middle Eastern countries to keep the oil flowing - toppling governments and taking sides in wars in the supposed "great game" of energy resources. But the game is almost over, because the old approaches are obviously failing.
Just when one is lulled into thinking that something other than oil is at the root of current US and British action in Iraq, reality pulls us back. Indeed, US President George W. Bush recently invited journalists to imagine the world 50 years from now. He did not have in mind the future of science and technology, a global population of 9 billion, or the challenges of climate change and biodiversity. Instead, he wanted to know whether Islamic radicals would control the world's oil.

Whatever we are worrying about in 50 years, this will surely be near the bottom of the list. Even if it were closer to the top, overthrowing Saddam Hussein to ensure oil supplies in 50 years ranks as the least plausible of strategies. Yet we know, from a range of evidence, that this is what was on Mr Bush's mind when his government shifted its focus from the search for Osama bin Laden to fighting a war in Iraq.


In any event, the war in Iraq will not protect the world's energy supplies in 50 years. If anything, it will threaten them by stoking the very radicalism it claims to be fighting. Genuine energy security will come not by invading and occupying the Middle East, or by attempting to impose pliant governments, but by recognising certain deeper truths about global energy.

First, energy strategy must satisfy three objectives: low cost, diverse supply and drastically reduced carbon-dioxide emissions. This will require massive investments in new technologies and resources, not a "fight to the finish" over Middle East oil. Important energy technology will include the conversion of coal to liquids (such as petrol and diesel), the use of tar sands and oil shale, and growth in non-fossil-fuel energy sources.

Indeed, there is excellent potential for low-cost solar power, zero-emitting coal-based technologies, and safe and reliable nuclear power. Solar radiation equals roughly 10,000 times our current energy use. We tap that solar power in many fundamental ways, but the possibilities are huge for a greatly increased use of inexpensive, widely available and environmentally friendly solar power.

Coal, like solar energy, is widely available. It is already inexpensive, but it is a major pollutant and a source of greenhouse-gas emissions. Yet these problems can be solved. Gasification of coal allows for the removal of dangerous pollutants, and coal can already be converted to liquid oil products at low cost; a South African company is beginning to bring that technology to China on a large scale. Nuclear power is yet another possibility for reliable and environmentally safe energy.

It is ironic that an administration fixated on the risks of Middle East oil has chosen to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to pursue unsuccessful military approaches to problems that should be solved at vastly lower cost, through research and development, regulation and market incentives. The biggest energy crisis of all, it seems, involves the misdirected energy of a US foreign policy built on war rather than scientific discovery and technological progress.

Jeffrey Sachs is a professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. Copyright: Project Syndicate



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZQZUM9CRE.html[/url]

love you

live

very good!

thank you fo:slap::slap:r sharing:slap:

:reading:

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The big question: how small should government be?



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Economist Milton Friedman hit the nail on the head when he said the four words "big market, small government" were fine but "it all depends on what you fill them with". As the debate continues on whether the catchy phrase adopted by the government is the same as "positive non-interventionism", there is a better question the community should be asking: what should the role of government be? We need to reach a consensus on the answer as it determines how "small" we want our government to be.
These days, even the most ardent free-market economists agree that unfettered capitalism is untenable, as the government needs to intervene in the markets to establish the ground rules and safeguard the public interest. What they differ on is the form and extent of such intervention.


Dr Friedman and his followers probably feel that our heavily subsidised, sizeable public housing and health-care programmes are blatant interventions in the market. But others, who feel the government should play a role in redistributing wealth, are of the view that Hong Kong is not doing nearly enough to narrow the wide gaps between the rich and the poor.

In fact, when and how extensively governments should intervene in business affairs has been an enduring theme in economic history. It is one over which wars have been fought, revolutions waged and, in the case of Hong Kong, rowdy demonstrations and spirited debates held.

Hong Kong has a low-tax regime and a policy of capping public spending at no more than 20 per cent of gross domestic product, compared with more than 40 per cent in many developed economies. The bulk of our budget is devoted to social spending on heavily subsidised education and welfare services, public housing for 30 per cent of the population and welfare for about 16 per cent.

Opinions are split on whether the government should do more or less. Some argue the size of our public sector is already too large as Hong Kong is a city that does not have to fund an army. Besides, unlike sovereign countries that have to maintain extensive diplomatic representations overseas, we run only a small number of economic and trade offices in key cities abroad and on the mainland. Others say Hong Kong should spend more on public services, although it is not always clear if they want the government to tax more and spend more, or cut existing services and use the savings on new ones.

Should the size of the public sector remain at less than 20 per cent of GDP? Or should it be expanded or reduced? Rather than dwelling on the semantic differences between "positive non-interventionism" and "big market, small government", these are the questions our officials and politicians should lead the public to debate. These are fundamental issues about what kind of a society we want Hong Kong to be and they are crucial to the making of tough decisions, such as whether to introduce a goods and services tax.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ1ITM9CRE.html[/url]

:reading: Thx

You certainly deserve a round of applause for all the effort !

[quote]­ì©«¥Ñ [i]oldfella[/i] ©ó 2006-9-27 18:53 µoªí
You certainly deserve a round of applause for all the effort ! [/quote]

Agree  ...... :applause::applause::applause:

Bravo, Brother ¤j¥Ð­^©ú !!!!!!!  :verygood::verygood:

Thursday, September 28, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
A chance for Japan to change with the times



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Japan's newly-elected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is his country's first leader born since the end of the second world war, and the cabinet he has appointed is generally of the same generation. That such a government has come about says much of present-day Japan and the urgent challenges its politicians face.
Those matters, ranging from stabilising the economy, through rehabilitating state finances to dealing with a rapidly ageing population and improving relations with neighbouring countries, have long been the bane of successive Japanese governments. Resolving them will be important in moving the nation forward, but the solution will be no easier for a cabinet without war memories than it has been for those faced with the same problems and, as a rule, a decade or two older.


Nonetheless, perceptions are important in this juncture of Japan's history, just as in 2001 when Mr Abe's flamboyant predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi, took office.

Mr Koizumi, then 59, was seen as a breath of fresh air capable of rejuvenating the image of the factious ruling Liberal Democratic Party and taking on Japan's ills. In five years, he accomplished what previous prime ministers had thought impossible: confronting the party's old guard to push through economic reforms, most notably the privatisation of the savings and insurance giant Japan Post. Single-handedly, he also turned back the clock of progress on relations with China and South Korea, insisting on yearly visits to the Yasukuni shrine to remember Japan's war dead.

The new prime minister, 52, has made implementing a broad Asian diplomacy one of his cabinet's key tasks. How it will go about that given that Foreign Minister Taro Aso, also a conservative who challenged for the premiership, has retained his job is unclear. While Mr Abe has said he wants better ties with Beijing and Seoul, he has side-stepped whether he intends to go to Yasukuni while in office. Foreign policy under him will, for now, have to be a wait-and-see matter, although if he truly wishes what he claims, he can readily make that happen.

Foreign ties may yet be governed by domestic issues. Keeping the economy from slipping back into deflation while taking into account a declining population, the need for a sustainable social security system, dealing with the outstanding 770 trillion yen (HK$51.41 trillion) debt of the central and local governments and the urgency of education and immigration reform will keep the cabinet busy.

Mr Abe has also made replacing the pacifist constitution his goal. He envisages the document will lead the country away from what he terms a "post-war regime" and guide the nation's future.

Mr Koizumi broke the mould of Japanese leaders. With Mr Abe and his team representing a younger, more energetic breed of politician, an opportunity exists for Japan to change with the times.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZGTJP9CRE.html[/url]

A chance for Japan to change with the times

[quote]­ì©«¥Ñ [i]¤j¥Ð­^©ú[/i] ©ó 2006-9-28 08:06 µoªí
Thursday, September 28, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
A chance for Japan to change with the times
   
Prev. Story | Next Story

. . . . . . . . . .

Mr Abe has also made replacing the pacifist constitution his goal. He envisages the document will lead the country away from what he terms a "post-war regime" and guide the nation's future.

Mr Koizumi broke the mould of Japanese leaders. With Mr Abe and his team representing a younger, more energetic breed of politician, an opportunity exists for Japan to change with the times
------------------------------------------------------ ... [/quote]

History always repeats itself. What happened to Mr Koizumi will highly probable to guide Mr. Abe's path soon. Those pulling the string remain the same group of old men behind the scene ..... :reading::reading:

Friday, September 29, 2006

US INTELLIGENCE REPORT
Face the grim truth about Iraq


DAVID IGNATIUS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   No matter how you slice it, the US National Intelligence Estimate warning that the Iraq war has spawned more terrorism is big trouble for US President George W. Bush and his party in this election year. It goes to the heart of Mr Bush's argument for invading Iraq, which was that it would make America safer.
Many Democrats act as if that's the end of the discussion: a mismanaged occupation has created a breeding ground for terrorists, so we should withdraw and let the Iraqis sort out the mess. Some extreme war critics are so angry at Mr Bush that they seem almost eager for America to lose, to prove a political point. Even among mainstream Democrats, the focus is "gotcha!" rather than "what next?" That is understandable, but it isn't right.


The issue raised by the intelligence report is much grimmer than the domestic political game. Iraq has fostered a new generation of terrorists. The question is what to do about that threat. How can America prevent Iraq from becoming a new safe haven? How does America restabilise a Middle East that today is dangerously unbalanced because of Washington's blunders in Iraq?

This should be the Democrats' moment, if they can translate the national anger over Iraq into a coherent strategy for the future. But with a few notable exceptions, they are mostly ducking the hard question of what to do next.


Here's a reality check for the Democrats: there is not a single country in the Middle East, with the possible exception of Iran, that favours a rapid American pullout from Iraq. Why? The consensus in the region is that a retreat now would have disastrous consequences for America and its allies. Yet withdrawal is the Iraq strategy you hear from most congressional Democrats, whether they call it "strategic redeployment" or something else.

I wish Democrats - and Republicans, for that matter - were asking this question: how do we prevent Iraq from becoming a failed state? Many critics of the war would argue that the worst has already happened - Iraq has already unravelled. Unfortunately, as bad as things are, they could get considerably worse. Following a rapid American pullout, Iraq could descend into a full-blown civil war, with the Sunni-Shi'ite violence spreading outward throughout the region.

In this chaos, oil supplies could be threatened, sending the price of oil well above US$100 a barrel. Turkey, Iran and Jordan would intervene to protect their interests.

The Democrat who has tried hardest to think through these problems is Senator Joseph Biden. He argues that the current government of national unity isn't succeeding in holding Iraq together, and that America should instead embrace a policy of "federalism plus" that will devolve power to the Shi'ite, Sunni and Kurdish regions. Iraqis are already voting for sectarian solutions, Senator Biden argues, and America won't stabilise Iraq unless it aligns its policy with this reality.

Iraq has compounded Muslim rage and created a dangerous crisis for the United States. The damage of Iraq can be mitigated only if it again becomes the nation's war - with the whole country invested in finding a way out of the morass that doesn't leave us permanently in greater peril. If the Democrats could lead that kind of debate about security, they would become the nation's governing party.

David Ignatius is a Washington Post columnist.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZXH0N9CRE.html[/url]

US INTELLIGENCE REPORT

It¡¦s hard to think of a president and an administration ever in the American history more devoted to secrecy than President Bush and his team. If not when it suits Mr. Bush and the Republican camp politically, it is difficult to believe that the public will ever be given a glimpse of those secrets.

But the three declassified pages from what is certainly a voluminous report did not tell us anything more than what any American with a newspaper, television or Internet connection should have already known. The invasion of Iraq was a catastrophic disaster. The current situation will get worse if American forces leave. However, the crucial issue of a suggestion about how to avoid that inevitable disaster was neither provided in the report nor by the president.

But one of the key findings of the National Intelligence Estimate, which represents the consensus of the 16 intelligence agencies, was quite clear that the war in Iraq has greatly increased the threat from terrorism by ¡§shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives.¡¨

It listed the war in Iraq as the second most important factor in the spread of terrorism ¡X after ¡§entrenched grievances such as corruption, injustice and fear of Western domination.¡¨ And that was before April, when the report was completed. Since then, things have got much worse.

But then why the Bush Administration decided to share this piece of information with his U.S. citizens ?

The New York Times claimed as follows : Mr. Bush decided to release this small, selected chunk of the report in reaction to an article on the intelligence assessment that appeared in The Times over the weekend. As a defense of his policies, it serves only to highlight the maddening circular logic that passes for a White House rationale. It goes like this: [b]The invasion of Iraq has created an entire new army of terrorists who will be emboldened by an American withdrawal. Therefore, the United States has to stay indefinitely and keep fighting those terrorists[/b].

By that logic, the more the United States fights, the longer the war stretches on.

Disclosure of the classified report, and Bush's subsequent move to make public portions of it, has had broad political ramifications. The escalating debate over national security reflects the belief among strategists in both parties that the terrorism issue works to their benefit. The question is how voters will interpret each side's arguments.

For Republicans, the report provides more evidence that Iraq is central to the war on terrorism and can't be abandoned without giving jihadists a crucial victory. Republicans have also sought to portray Democrats as inadequate to the job of protecting the nation, pursuing an election-year strategy of trying to mobilize conservative voters in key districts by arguing that Democrats would "cut and run" from Iraq and thus embolden terrorists.

And for Democrats, it furthers their argument that the 2003 Iraq invasion has inflamed anti-U.S. sentiments in the Muslim world and left the U.S. less safe. Democrats, citing shrinking public support for Bush and the Iraq war in some recent polls, have tried to portray the administration as incompetent.   

On the other hand, this incidence also brought out the wisdom of Mr. Rumsfield and his art of debating over this issue in his following remarks :

[i](Rumsfeld did not specifically criticize or address the controversial intelligence report, but instead commented more broadly about the terrorist question that has gripped the political world since the report was disclosed last week.

"Are more terrorists being created in the world? We don't know. The world doesn't know," said Rumsfeld, adding that there are no good ways to measure "The world doesn't know. There aren't good ways to measure how many terrorists are being trained at camps around the world.") ¡K¡K.

(Rumsfeld said any specific comments on the report should come from Bush. But he added that while it's hard to know how many terrorist are being created, officials have a better idea how many have been killed or captured.)[/i] ¡K¡K

There was offered a split-screen debate between each party's most influential leader this week with Clinton's appearance Sunday and Bush's news conference Tuesday.

Clinton accused Bush of spending billions of dollars in Iraq while losing focus on capturing Bin Laden in or near Afghanistan. "If I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him."

Clinton also criticised Bush's broader agenda of promoting democracy overseas, in particular, in Middle East, subtly contesting the president's frequent argument that [i]free elections in Iraq and Afghanistan were signs of progress[/i].  "[b]Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power[/b]."

Bush on Tuesday declined to respond directly to Clinton's comments even though "I've watched all this finger-pointing and naming of names, and all that stuff," Bush said. "Our objective is to secure the country¡K. So I'm not going to comment on other comments."

If we look at what happened in Taiwan and Thailand recently, we must admit that Bush-style of democracy has proved to be successful on the voting day of presidential election in these two S.E. Asian countries but unfortunately short-lived. It has failed in Thailand. What will happen in Taiwan remains to be seen. But from what happened in Iraq, we can foretell that the current Taiwan political turmoil will simply drag on and on and on ..............:reading::reading:

[[i] ¥»©«³Ì«á¥Ñ taurus ©ó 2006-9-29 06:26 PM ½s¿è [/i]]

Tuesday, October 3, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Building design has key role to play in recycling



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The Environmental Protection Department's proposal to amend building regulations in a bid to encourage the separation and recycling of domestic waste deserves support. It aims to make it easier for people to participate in recycling and, in this way, help develop a more sustainable lifestyle.
Officials want to change the building code to ensure that every residential building has a purpose-built room on every floor for the collection of rubbish, providing residents easier access to segregated recycling bins.



Generating as little waste as possible is an essential component of the sustainable society that Hong Kong must try to achieve. But doing it is not as easy as it sounds in this space-challenged city.

This has been illustrated by a pilot scheme that aimed to encourage housing estates to sort and recycle their waste. After expanding at a rapid rate to cover 420 housing estates accommodating about 26 per cent of the population, the scheme has failed to expand further. Those that have failed to join up are not averse to the scheme, but are barred from participating by the physical constraints of the buildings in which they live.

The amazing fact that has so far escaped attention, so far as policy-making is concerned, is that most residential buildings in Hong Kong do not have built-in facilities for handling waste. Garbage bins are typically placed at staircase platforms as an afterthought, sometimes at the risk of breaching fire safety rules. There is simply no space for putting several bins on each floor for separately collecting recyclable waste such as plastic, aluminium cans and paper, as well as waste that cannot be recycled.

At many buildings, the rubbish collection process is also very unhygienic. As they are not fitted with service lifts or disposal shafts, waste collectors with their trolleys use residents' lifts for carrying rubbish. The only exceptions are public housing blocks, which have purpose-built collection rooms on every floor, connected by shafts.

The lack of attention to rubbish disposal facilities at housing estates would likely change if the government were to impose a garbage fee to encourage people to embrace recycling. Reducing waste and fostering recycling by imposing a green tax is sound. But the idea would be socially and politically more acceptable if buildings were designed to facilitate waste separation and recycling.

The Buildings Department has made efforts to make buildings more environmentally friendly by reviewing its requirements and encouraging the inclusion of so-called green features.


For the sake of both cleaner living and waste reduction, the Environmental Protection Department's advice should be heeded. Purpose-built rooms for rubbish collection should become standard features in new buildings, and help provided to make such space in old buildings.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZZODN9CRE.html[/url]

:reading: :reading: :reading: :reading: :reading:
Thanks for sharing.

"Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power."

Certainly some food for thought !

[quote]­ì©«¥Ñ [i]oldfella[/i] ©ó 2006-10-3 18:14 µoªí
"Democracy is about way more than majority rule," "Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power."

Certainly some food for thought ! [/quote]


Certainly some food for thought [i]and our stomach as well[/i] !  :lol

Presently reading Larry Diamond's past papers, try to extact one of these which will be applicable to HK ..... :reading:

Wednesday, October 4, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The UN: a test of strength if ever there was one



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The United Nations has, sadly, suffered collateral damage in a world changed forever by terrorism. Its authority was diminished by the US-led invasion of Iraq without UN support, and its credibility damaged by indecision in the face of challenges thrown up by the new threat. In the midst of a crisis of relevance, its reputation was shredded by the exposure of internal corruption and mismanagement that led to the disappearance of billions of dollars from the oil-for-food programme meant to help poor Iraqis before the war.
The priority of the next secretary-general of the UN must therefore be to preside over the restoration of the world body's moral authority and credibility. That is a lot to ask of one person whose position carries plenty of prestige but who, rather than exercising real power, is dependent on forging consensus. However, a number were prepared to take it on - mainly Asians, because it was Asia's turn at the top job for the first time since  U Thant, who held it between 1961 and 1971. As the only one to command the support of all five permanent members of the Security Council, South Korea's foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, is assured of formal approval by the council and the General Assembly.

  
The big five rarely remain in agreement for long, but Mr Ban will clearly need all the support he can get from them - and particularly from the US - if the standing of the UN is to be restored. He strongly supports reform of the world body, which did his candidature no harm in Washington.

Outgoing secretary-general Kofi Annan tried to make a start on ridding the organisation of corruption and overly bureaucratic operations, but some of his more important initiatives have been stalled in the General Assembly.

There is no time to lose in restoring the standing of the UN, given what is almost a daily roster of security or humanitarian threats, such as those in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan, the Iranian and North Korean nuclear disputes and the Darfur crisis in Sudan.

Mr Ban says, rightly, that the most urgent issues confronting the UN remain internal management reform and regaining the trust and confidence of member states and major stakeholders. It needs to promise less, deliver more and reduce the overlap between its agencies in delivery of services. Perhaps when it has tidied up its own backyard it can address difficult issues shelved in the past, like a broad agreement on the definition of terrorism and the use of pre-emptive force.

Despite the inevitable flaws of a co-operative body and its recent troubles, the UN still offers the best hope of resolution of conflict and alleviation of human suffering through international co-operation. The mild-mannered diplomat who will be its next chief says he may look soft but that he has inner strength when he needs it. He will need it, and often.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ7JCN9CRE.html[/url]

:reading:  thank you
BTW, I want to ask if you type the whoe passage, or cut&paste/scan.

Thursday, October 5, 2006

WELFARE
A reason to get off the safety net


C.K. LAU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Social workers have complained about a government scheme aimed at helping people get off the dole: they say it's virtually forcing them to pressure welfare recipients to accept low-pay jobs. The scheme puts the social workers in a difficult situation, they say, as they stand to receive a bonus for finding work for a target number of recipients.
The social workers' complaint raises a few questions: how should they be paid and their performance assessed? As for encouraging welfare recipients to find work, would it help to introduce a minimum wage?

  
Social workers have the unenviable job of counselling and organising suitable activities for people who are emotionally or materially deprived. As professionals, they are supposed to try their best to help the needy, and their personal interests should not affect the level of service they provide.

The bonus arrangement could be seen as an affront to their professionalism, as it tempts them to persuade welfare recipients to accept poorly paid jobs.

To be sure, social workers who take part in the scheme to help welfare recipients find work should not be likened to employment agents. The latter get paid only for finding the right recruits for employers, and finding work for job seekers.

Social workers have the rather specialised task of encouraging those who have been on the dole for a long time to muster the willpower to work for a living again. Many of their clients may not have a strong incentive to work, as Hong Kong does not have a time limit on welfare.

Yet, many people would probably object to paying social workers a fixed salary without regard for the number of welfare recipients they helped return to the working world. If that were the arrangement, would they all be equally enthusiastic about encouraging their clients to wean themselves off welfare?

How would social workers who have found work for many of their clients feel if they were paid no more than colleagues who have achieved zero placements? Even if we accept that every social worker is driven by a strong sense of professionalism, it shouldn't mean suitable incentives cannot be provided to reward those who are more effective.

Even so, the social workers' complaint about having to persuade welfare recipients to accept low-pay jobs does deserve a sympathetic hearing. At a press conference on Tuesday, several welfare recipients talked about being persuaded to accept jobs that pay as little as HK$14 an hour. A single mother with a 13-year-old son, who had been receiving HK$4,300 a month in welfare payments, said she now worked five days a month as a domestic worker for just HK$300 a month.

As the business and labour sectors continue to debate the case for introducing a minimum wage, a relevant consideration is how we can wean people off welfare when Hong Kong does not have a wage floor.

Employment and welfare are two sides of the same coin. Hong Kong does not have an official poverty line. But the income and asset limits for receiving welfare under the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance scheme are de facto poverty lines that affect the motivation to work.

Everyone who falls below those lines is entitled to welfare. Those who opt not to go on the dole have trouble making enough money to afford them a decent standard of living. So the incentive is just not there to encourage people to leave the welfare net.

Until a minimum wage is introduced, it will be impossible for the government to impose a time limit on welfare - the most effective weapon in reducing the number of welfare recipients.

C.K. Lau is the Post's executive editor, policy. [email]ck.lau@scmp.com[/email]



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZCIKN9CRE.html[/url]

Friday, October 6, 2006

WAN CHAI'S BLUE HOUSE
Tourism shell or living history?


ADA WONG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     


The Urban Renewal Authority and Housing Society announced their plan for a complete facelift of the 80-year-old Blue House in Wan Chai this year. The society has promised to foot a bill estimated at around HK$100 million.
The Blue House is a pre-war tenement-style historic building nestled in a quiet corner of Stone Nullah Lane off Queen's Road East. It was affectionately called the Blue House after its greyish walls were accidently painted marine blue by a Lands Department maintenance team.

Together with the nearby Bauhaus-style Wan Chai market, Blue House is one of the rare gems in the heart of old Wan Chai that has been left unscathed by the fervent pace of urban renewal. Civil society is heartened that the Blue House will not be bulldozed. The next question is: how should this heritage be conserved?

The plan of the two statutory bodies is to change the predominantly residential nature of this pre-war tong lau (low-rise walk-up) into yet another Covent Garden-like cultural tourism spot. Residents will leave. The space will be filled by a Chinese-style tea house, Chinese herbal medicine shops and other commercial activities. The open space at the back will be turned into a piazza suitable for the occasional Chinese traditional arts performance. Even a spa was mentioned.

While the initiative of the authority and society is laudable, their conservation plan is fundamentally flawed. First, the transformed Blue House will lose its cultural significance and become a "mummified" building with no connections to its past. Its colourful history will, ironically, be wiped out in the course of its "conservation". An artificial outer shell will remain for the sake of cultural tourism, while the more valuable but intangible social network will be destroyed.

People - thousands of them - have shaped the Blue House for almost a century. It exemplifies those sweet but difficult days of a bygone era. It tells us many stories of the struggles and perseverance of Hong Kong's first generation of immigrants. The Blue House welcomed many of them, and a small hospital and two schools were once housed on its upper floors.

Former residents are eager to tell their stories. One person who grew up there recalls vividly how, with three families squeezed into a small apartment, the children still managed to find a place to play badminton amid the bunk beds.

The Blue House is home to a tightly knit community. Tenants rely on an organic neighbourhood support system to survive and make ends meet.

The widely respected Burra Charter of 1999 - Australia's principles and procedures for conserving heritage places - defines conservation as "all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance".

I believe the cultural significance of the Blue House is found not only in its architectural style but in its rich history, as well. The proper documentation and conservation of that history will strengthen our appreciation of a way of life that we no longer know.

If the Urban Renewal Authority and Housing Society abide by the Burra Charter, then the residential nature of the Blue House should be retained. Long-time residents must have a choice of continuing to stay after the renovation. The grand plans of the authority and society are also flawed because local people did not participate in planning its conservation and adaptation.

The community is a stakeholder when it comes to decisions on "adaptation" which - according to the Burra Charter - is only permitted when the changes will have a minimal impact on the cultural significance of a place. The rule of thumb is: if the building is not in a dangerous state, minimum intervention is the best strategy.

Heritage is not renewable. Mistakes cannot be reversed. Hong Kong has already made so many irreversible mistakes in heritage conservation. Let's be sure we make the right decisions for the Blue House.

Ada Wong is chairwoman of Wan Chai District Council.

[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZJ35Q9CRE.html[/url]

thnaks

:reading:  THX

Monday, October 9, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Well-balanced children need work and play



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Parents want the best for their children and it is therefore understandable that many in Hong Kong feel the need to instil in their offspring a passion for learning. Education is widely seen, after all, as a pathway to prosperity and happiness.
Whether wealth and happiness are one and the same is a hotly debated point; there is no doubt, though, that students with the best school marks get first choice when it comes to universities and courses. If they maintain their academic form they supposedly in line for the pick of jobs when they graduate.


It is hardly surprising therefore that a survey shows that more than 70 per cent of parents questioned believed their children's main activity out of school hours should be academically inclined. Revising home work was seen by six of every 10 parents as the best pastime, while 10 per cent preferred their children to read books. Only 11 per cent thought taking time out for a one-on-one chat was the most important activity, while hobbies and sports ranked low on the list.

This is a worrying revelation and the consequences are clearly borne out by the lack of laughter and smiles among the children on our streets. Generally, they have intense looks on their faces as they rush from school, presumably to the tutorials lined up by their parents.

There is nothing wrong with raising children to be successful by having them embrace learning. Limiting the time they spend watching television or playing computer games and rewarding them for reading books is to be encouraged. Sitting down as a family to go through a report card and to set goals for improvement shows a sense of caring and provides valuable input.

But children need more than study to develop into well-rounded adults. They must have time with their friends beyond an on-line chat room; physical activities such as sports or hiking are essential to ward off obesity; hobbies keep minds active and engender interest in matters non-academic; and for the sake of family relationships, parents must find time for a chat to get to know their offspring.

Hong Kong is not an easy environment in which to allow this to happen. Parks and playgrounds are limited in number, size and facilities; the high population density makes pastimes taken for granted in other affluent societies, such as bicycle riding, out of the question in many places; costs often make activities a once-in-a-while treat; long working hours and cramped living conditions can make family interaction less than perfect.

But the government has recognised the need for change and, since last year, has been phasing out the rote learning method of teaching. Improving lifestyles by providing more and better public and living spaces is now seen as an essential part of our city's development.

Similarly, parents need to recognise that their children need a balance between school work and time to themselves and with their family and friends. Education alone is not a guarantee of professional success or happiness.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZVZSN9CRE.html[/url]

Just want you to know that your quiet service is much appreicated:verygood::applause::applause:

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

WORLD BANK
Corruption isn't the only issue


JOSEPH STIGLITZ
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   At the recent annual meeting of the World Bank, officials spokeextensively about corruption. It is an understandable concern: money the bank lends to developing countries that ends up in secret accounts - or finances some contractors' luxurious lifestyle - leaves a country more indebted, not more prosperous.
James Wolfensohn, the bank's previous president, and I are widely credited with putting corruption on the bank's agenda. We prevailed against opponents who regarded it as a political rather than an economic issue, and thus outside the bank's mandate.


But the World Bank would do well to keep four things in mind as it takes up the fight. First, corruption takes many forms, so a war on corruption has to be fought on many fronts. In some countries, overt corruption occurs primarily through campaign contributions that oblige politicians to repay major donors with favours. Smaller-scale corruption is bad, but systemic corruption of political processes can have even greater costs.

Second, it's fine for the World Bank to deliver anti-corruption sermons. But policies, procedures and institutions are what matter. In fact, the bank's procurement procedures are generally viewed around the world as a model to be admired.

But success in fighting corruption entails more than just good procurement procedures - avoiding, for instance, single-source, non-competitive bidding. Many other policies and procedures can be enacted that reduce incentives for corruption. For example, some tax systems are more corruption-resistant than others, because they curtail the discretionary authority of tax officials.

Third, the World Bank's primary responsibility is to fight poverty. This means that when it confronts a poor country plagued with corruption, its challenge is to figure out how to ensure that its own money is not tainted - and that it reaches the projects and people that need it.

Finally, while developing countries must take responsibility for rooting out corruption, there is much that the west can do to help. At a minimum, western governments and corporations should not be complicit. Every bribe that is taken has a payer, and too often the bribe payer is a corporation from an advanced industrial country.

Making all payments to governments transparent would bring further progress. Western governments could encourage this simply by tying this requirement to tax deductibility. It is equally important to address bank secrecy, which makes corruption easier by providing corrupt dictators with a safe haven for their funds.

Some of those who criticise the bank's stance on corruption worry that the campaign will be used as a "cover" for cutting aid to countries that displease the US administration.

The most strident criticism, however, comes from those who worry that the World Bank is straying from its mandate. Naturally, it must do everything it can to ensure that its money is well spent - which means fighting both corruption and incompetence.

But money itself will not solve all problems, and a single-minded focus on fighting corruption will not bring development. On the contrary, it might merely divert attention from other issues of no less importance for those struggling to lift themselves out of poverty.

Joseph Stiglitz is a Nobel laureate in economics. Copyright: Project Syndicate. [url]www.project-syndicate.org[/url]



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZYXWN9CRE.html[/url]

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
China must reassess its position on Myanmar



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Myanmar's military leaders do not threaten Asia like their North Korean counterparts; they are not known to have ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons, nor do they have soldiers lining the border of a neighbouring country as the North does with South Korea. But this is no benign regime that should be ignored, as the poor state of the nation and the atrocities committed against its people attest.
Just as with North Korea, the world needs to pressure the regime to change and ensure China, India and Russia, the nations propping up the junta through economic and military help, see the error of their ways. The three have not joined western and Southeast Asian nations in expressing concern about the junta. They have shunned imposing sanctions and used engagement for strategic benefit - a process which, given Myanmar's stagnation, is having no effect.


The generals who run Myanmar would like to have us think that they have the welfare of the 50 million people they rule at heart. Their reconvening of a constitutional convention yesterday was aimed at discussing the role of political parties and elections under a seven-stage plan to restore the democracy lost when the military seized power in 1962. They have agreed to let UN deputy secretary-general Ibrahim Gambari return next month.

These would seem to be moves in the right direction, but there is good reason to be sceptical about them. The junta has no wish to give up power, and experience has shown that it cannot be trusted.

The opposition National League for Democracy knows this only too well, which is why it has refused to take part in the 13-year-old constitution-drafting process. Denied the right to form a government despite winning elections in 1990, its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, remains under house arrest. As the UN Security Council took up the issue of Myanmar for the first time last month, a fresh crackdown was launched on critics, more than 1,000 of whom are already jailed.

Myanmar has rich natural resources, yet is Southeast Asia's second-poorest nation. Bad nutrition levels, high disease rates and inadequate health facilities mean average life expectancy is just over 60 years. A quarter of the population lives in poverty. China's bid to have a higher international profile and to play more of a role in world affairs will be undermined if it continues to be protective of such a regime.

Beijing claims the generals pose no threat, and therefore objected to discussion of Myanmar at the Security Council. Yet it is precisely such governments that need to be talked about at the highest possible level because while they may not bother other nations, their own people are unnecessarily suffering.

For Myanmar's sake, China and its allies must set aside narrow economic and strategic interests and work with the rest of the world.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZDDIQ9CRE.html[/url]

谢谢¡I·P谢§Aªº发¨¥¡I

Thursday, October 12, 2006

EDUCATION
A+ for kindergarten vouchers


C.K. LAU
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The government has taken a significant step by extending the public subsidy to pre-primary education, opening a new route to funding kindergartens.


Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen announced yesterday that education vouchers would be issued to parents to help them pay kindergarten fees.

The new policy will make Hong Kong one of a few jurisdictions in the world to embrace, albeit partially, an education voucher scheme. The idea was first championed by renowned economist Milton Friedman more than 50 years ago.

The scheme is a major departure from the established mode of funding education. The government now funds designated public schools and universities directly.

Under the scheme, public money will go to parents - who will decide which kindergarten to spend it on.

Given our local circumstances, vouchers are an ideal way to subsidise kindergartens. Hong Kong has long had a thriving pre-primary sector, and there is almost universal enrolment of children between the ages of three and six in kindergartens.

At present, in terms of their curriculums, about 680 kindergartens are classified as local and more than 50 as international. The total student population stands at about 130,000. Most of them are non-profit-making.

With no direct government funding, kindergartens have long been used to living with market forces.

The survival of individual schools depends wholly on their appeal to parents and the demographic trends of their respective neighbourhoods.

Had the government opted to fund kindergartens directly, it would have had to embark on the difficult task of choosing which of them should receive public funding. It would also have had to decide which ones to close, as the student population continues to shrink. The whole exercise would have been a controversial one that could never please everyone.

But there's a major flaw in the voucher scheme as announced by Mr Tsang yesterday: it will apply only to non-profit-making kindergartens charging not more than HK$24,000 per student per year.

For those who feel that public funding should not be used to line the pockets of operators of profit-making kindergartens, the decision makes sense.

Yet, if the purpose of the voucher scheme is, in the words of Mr Tsang, "to support the family by easing the financial burden of parents", then the exclusion cannot be justified.

Arguably, every child should have the right to receive a subsidised education irrespective of the type of school his or her parents choose. Those who opt for private schools should not be penalised by being denied public funding.

Even if we accept that only non-profit-making kindergartens should be eligible for public subsidies, the decision to limit such funding to schools charging less than HK$24,000 is also questionable.

The cap is apparently aimed at barring kindergartens from raising their fees as a result of public funding. Even so, the limit is arguably too low, and may lead to the unintended effect of penalising kindergartens that charge fees beyond that level.

Despite these drawbacks, the adoption of the voucher scheme for kindergartens is a major breakthrough for Hong Kong. Let's hope it can be extended to other education sectors, in time.

This makes associate degree programmes the only area that receives no public funding. When resources are available, associate degree students should be issued vouchers to help them pay their fees.

C.K. Lau is the Post's executive editor, [email]policy.ck.lau@scmp.com[/email]



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8VLQ9CRE.html[/url]

:reading: Thank you.

Friday, October 13, 2006

IRAN AND NORTH KOREA
The grip of US 'soft' power


JIM HOAGLAND
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   North Korea has, in its own inimitable fashion, paid tribute to a little-noticed US push to get the world's bankers to isolate regimes that promote nuclear proliferation and terrorism. Who else would claim to have conducted a nuclear weapons test - and then threaten more blasts to get their way in a US$24 million banking dispute? Don't they have any good lawyers in Pyongyang?
North Korea's efforts to blame its crossing of the nuclear-testing threshold on US "economic hostility" would be laughable - if the regime were not led by world-class paranoids and fantasists capable of believing their own odious propaganda. Americans do not have to believe it, however.


Such a regime may be beyond reasoning with or, even worse, deterring in a conventional sense, as the Bush administration seems to believe.

But Pyongyang's threats - if not its excuses - must be taken seriously, and met with new forms of containment and pressure. The same is true of Iran, the other major target of the US Treasury Department's efforts "to isolate bad actors from the global financial system" - by calling attention to their use of banks for rogue operations.

That description comes from Stuart Levey, the Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "If the objective was to put pressure on North Korea, well, we succeeded," said Mr Levey. He has joined Deputy Treasury Secretary Robert Kimmitt in travelling the globe to persuade other governments to examine and, where appropriate, cut financial links to Pyongyang and Tehran.

But the purpose of this effective new effort to exert pressure with "soft power" is much broader. According to Mr Levey, the Treasury Department is targeting people who are eminently deterrable: "People who are in business are very concerned about their reputations and do not want to get involved in illicit activity that is under scrutiny. They will make the decisions about whether they continue doing business or not. We don't make the decision for them." Mr Levey disputes North Korea's characterisation of US policy as being one of politically driven "sanctions".

"The United States effectively lifted sanctions against North Korea in 2000, and the Bush administration has not reimposed them," Mr Levey asserted. "What we are doing is calling attention to the risks in being involved in these transactions."

The first use of the heavy US financial hammer was against the Macau-based Banco Delta Asia, which the Treasury identified last year as a "primary money-laundering concern" for Pyongyang. The bank, which operates under the control of the Chinese government, froze an estimated US$24 million in North Korean assets rather than risk losing US and other business.


North Korea clearly takes these financial pressures seriously. So must Iran. Squeezing the regime financially is probably the only hope of keeping Tehran from going nuclear. Iran was forced to announce three months ago that its oil production is declining - in large part, experts say, because of a long-term lack of new investment in the oil industry and the difficulty of getting new technology from abroad for its faltering fields.

Access to capital and advanced equipment will not have been helped by the US decision last month to exclude Bank Saderat, Iran's largest state-owned bank, from buying or selling dollars and other financial instruments from US banks. This is in response to the bank's role in transferring millions of dollars to terrorist groups.

In the early days of the Soviet Union, Lenin predicted that capitalists would eagerly sell him the rope he would use to hang them. He lost the bet when Moscow proved unable to pay for ruling an empire. The Treasury's sophisticated efforts to deny gangsters in North Korea and Iran access to global capital should not be abandoned because of the nuclear bluster from Pyongyang and Tehran.

Jim Hoagland is a Washington Post columnist.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ6P6O9CRE.html[/url]

Monday, October 16, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
China must make sanctions work



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The divergent response of China and other UN Security Council nations to the sanctions imposed on North Korea for apparently testing its first nuclear device would seem to foreshadow difficulties in enforcing the resolution. Whatever the statements of Chinese officials, however, now that the deal has been approved, Beijing must do its utmost to prevent Pyongyang from spreading or acquiring more nuclear materials and technology.
China has, after all, a firm position on this matter, as strongly expressed by the Foreign Ministry last week: "To bring about denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and oppose nuclear proliferation." For the sake of regional stability and its own security, ridding North Korea of nuclear weapons and ambitions should be Beijing's foreign policy priority.


Nonetheless, the contentious issue of inspecting cargo leaving and arriving in North Korea's ports, as stipulated by the resolution, is difficult for China, given its status as Pyongyang's foremost ally.

China is the nation most able to get the secretive country to scrap its nuclear ambitions. Provoking confrontation with a newly declared nuclear neighbour is the last thing Beijing wants - hence its reticence, along with fellow North Korean ally and neighbour Russia, to back the original wording of the resolution. This was done under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which leaves open a military option. The compromise was to preclude that threat. But the mainland has no choice, now that it has backed the finalised agreement, than to enforce its provisions.

How stringently mainland border and maritime officials do this is, on a case by case basis, up to the officers concerned. The US and European nations did not face the same sensitivities as China when drafting the resolution.

Beijing does not have the luxury of long-distance lambasting. While it has joined the rest of the world in condemning North Korea for threatening global security, it has to deal far more diplomatically with the problem on its doorstep.

Regardless of the difficulties, though, the Security Council's authority must also be preserved at all costs; resolutions approved must be abided by and enforced as closely as possible.

Whether China's ambassador to the UN, Wang Guangya , meant to undermine that authority by saying after the vote that the mainland would not conduct any inspections is unclear in the absence of official reaction from Beijing. Having just voted for the resolution, he can hardly reject its provisions.

Whatever the difficulties, China must do its utmost to make the sanctions work. Only with strict enforcement will North Korea be persuaded to return to the dialogue that it broke away from in preference to proliferation.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZPXSQ9CRE.html[/url]

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

SINO-AUSTRALIAN RELATIONS
When ignorance is bliss


GREG BARNS
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Australians like China. That's according to a public opinion survey released this month by the Lowy Institute, a foreign-policy focused think-tank based in Sydney. It appears that Australians are much more willing to ignore China's human rights violations and lack of democracy than is the case with Indonesia. Despite the latter's strides towards democracy within the past decade, Australians see their near northern neighbour in essentially negative terms.
But when it comes to assessing Australians' warmth of feeling towards other countries, China scores well. Sixty-one per cent of respondents felt positive about China. This places it only one percentage point behind Australia's traditional ally, the US, and only three points behind Japan - one of its largest trade partners. By contrast, only 50 per cent of Australians said they felt warmly about Indonesia. And China's rating could go higher, as 59 per cent of those surveyed believe relations are improving. By contrast, 47 per cent believe ties with Indonesia are worsening.


China seems to be trusted by Australians to act more responsibly than the US around the world. The survey records that while 38 per cent of respondents believe Beijing cannot be trusted to act responsibly in global affairs, 39 per cent think the same about Washington. And while there's global nervousness about China's rise as a global power, Australians seem relatively relaxed, ranking it last on a list of 13 threats to Australia's interests over the next decade.

But while the survey reveals a relatively positive disposition towards China, there is some ambivalence in these results. Eighty per cent trust China only "somewhat or not at all". No doubt, however, China's tough stance on North Korea in the past week will enhance its standing.

So why are Australians relatively optimistic and positive about China? The answer may lie in the contrasting attitude towards Indonesia.

Over the past decade, Indonesia has featured prominently in the Australian media and politics. Indonesian resistance to independence for East Timor contrasted with the efforts of the Australian leadership to ensure the birth of that nation seven years ago.

Then there have been high-profile cases of Australians being charged and punished for allegedly trafficking in drugs on the Indonesian island of Bali.

The Indonesian justice system is viewed by many Australians as corrupt, and particularly unfair to Australians. When a young Australian, Schapelle Corby, was jailed for 20 years for trafficking in cannabis, anti-Indonesian sentiment reached alarming levels in Australia.

The perceived leniency towards the perpetrators of the 2002 Bali bombings, in which 88 Australians were killed, has not helped, either.

In contrast, while there is some focus here on what an Australian-Chinese free-trade agreement might mean in terms of job losses and investment - and on whether Australia should sell uranium to China - it is a bit remote from the average Australian. China, it seems, can get away with being a dictatorship, while Indonesia's efforts to become a transparent democracy are not being recognised by Australians, if the survey is any guide.

Australian political commentator Paul Kelly says the local media is partly responsible for this view of the world.

Its "denigration of Indonesian democracy in contrast to its tolerance of China's dictatorship is entrenched and has passed into popular Australian sentiment", he wrote.


But if the media gives prominence to cases of Australians having their human rights abused by the Chinese authorities, or it begins to showcase examples of Chinese actions taking away Australian jobs, then China might find itself in Indonesia's shoes. For the moment, however, Australians are giving China a big tick.

Greg Barns is a political commentator in Australia and a former Australian government adviser.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZAKZQ9CRE.html[/url]

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Ignorance the biggest hurdle in fighting HIV



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   It is one thing for China's rulers in Beijing to make decisions that affect people's lives, but another thing entirely for the message to reach 1.3 billion people through layers of authority and officialdom at provincial, city and local levels.
How much harder it must be then for Beijing to change social attitudes. President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao have tried, going to some lengths to remove the social stigma of HIV/Aids and raise the profile of the disease on the national health agenda.


Both have made televised personal visits to patients to help break down prejudice. The number of new cases has continued to rise, however, and local mainland officials have been blamed for disregarding national policy on prevention and treatment.

An example has come to light in Harbin , Heilongjiang , where residents and the police were upset by a public lecture for sex workers on prevention and treatment of HIV/Aids. The lecture was held by the Harbin Disease Prevention and Control Centre's Aids Prevention and Control Institute. Many critics said the health authorities should work with police to get prostitutes arrested; the police said the lecture was unacceptable and made them "feel uncomfortable".

However, an online poll conducted by Sina.com showed overwhelming support for the lecture among a more broadly representative group of nearly 5,000. This is encouraging, because education to overcome ignorance about HIV/Aids and promote safe-sex practices remains the most effective means of combating the disease.

Today's report in which a senior central government health official says China is becoming like Africa in the way the virus is transmitted shows that Beijing should leave no stone unturned in its efforts to see that the message does get through.

Figures given by Hao Yang , deputy director general of the bureau of diseases prevention and control at the Ministry of Health, are disturbing: HIV/Aids has spread beyond high-risk groups such as drug users, prostitutes and homosexuals to become a "generalised epidemic"; 48 per cent of new cases last year arose from sexual relations; 1 per cent of all pregnant women are infected.

Regional health officials have long warned against a false sense of security that Asia is shielded from the devastating effects of Aids in some African countries. The possibility that the virus could easily spread into the general population increases as Asians embrace less conservative values, with more young people having casual sex.

In Hong Kong, HIV infections are increasing three times faster than 20 years ago. The Department of Health puts this down mainly to unsafe gay sex. However, given that Hong Kong may be vulnerable to the spread of HIV/Aids originating from the mainland or the rest of Asia, education in disease prevention and easy access to testing remain important.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ5KGO9CRE.html[/url]

Thursday, October 19, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
Working smarter, not harder, the way forward



   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Three months after the government took the lead to introduce a five-day work week, a survey has found that more than 60 per cent of employers have no plans to follow suit. The finding should not come as a surprise, as it takes time for the effect of the initiative to permeate the community. But it does mean the government has to do more to address the unhealthy work-life balance that is still afflicting the bulk of the workforce.
It is encouraging that the survey by Community Business has revealed that almost 30 per cent of respondents already enjoy a five-day week, and the employers of a further 10 per cent are considering adopting the practice. The findings suggest that Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's decision to introduce a five-day week for most civil servants is achieving the intended effect of encouraging other employers to do the same.


However, the positive response has come mainly from public bodies and big private companies. As the survey has confirmed, many workplaces - particularly small and medium-sized companies - still have a six-day work week. It is also common for workers to do unpaid overtime on a daily basis. Many suffer from various symptoms of fatigue and stress that are attributed to long working hours. So much of their day is consumed by work that they have little time left to savour other aspects of life.

In his policy address last week, Mr Tsang reiterated his commitment to improving the quality of family life. He said the government would work with non-governmental organisations to promote various family-friendly work practices, including flexitime, job-sharing and working from home. This is certainly the right way forward.

Most employers do care about the welfare of their workers. Many are likely to be willing to adopt such practices so long as they do not affect their bottom line. But they baulk at doing so because they do not know how. Perhaps some NGOs could take up the task of collecting and sharing information on how companies can introduce a five-day work week and other family-friendly work practices through creative work arrangements. Annual awards could also be introduced to recognise innovative ways of reducing working hours and enhancing productivity.

Hong Kong can raise its productivity only by working smarter, not harder. Employers need to appreciate that their workers can only upgrade or refresh their skills if they have more spare time for relaxation and self-improvement.

Compared with other economies at a similar level of economic development, such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, Hong Kong has been slow in embracing a five-day week.

When even the mainland and Nepal have adopted the practice years ago, it is a shame that workers in what the government touts as Asia's world city are still toiling six days a week.


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ3TOO9CRE.html[/url]

Re : Working smarter, not harder, the way forward

As far as I remember, five work-day week started in China in 2000. Good for our fellow comrades ... :lol

Friday, October 20, 2006

EDITORIAL/LEADER
The course China must take to combat graft



  
Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   It is not so long ago that a crisis of capitalism in the US dragged attention away from corruption in China. Investor losses caused by fraud, corruption and insider trading stretched public confidence in the integrity of corporate America to breaking point.
The scandals triggered nationwide probes by investigators and market regulators that have uncovered widespread malpractice. Companies have agreed to large settlements that go some way to compensating victims.

  
Wall Street was compelled to address conflict-of-interest issues in the use of analysts' reports to promote share sales, and Congress tightened corporate law to increase transparency and restore confidence. The criminal law has followed its own course. Wrongdoers have been severely punished and in some cases ill-gotten gains have been recovered.

If that could happen in the home of capitalism, which stands or falls on trust and confidence, it surely would have been a sharp reminder to China's leaders about the danger posed by corruption and greed to the mainland's emerging market economy. It came too late, however, for the kind of reforms needed to expose and cut out the cancer of official corruption on the mainland, even if the Communist Party was ready to adopt them.

The leadership has given priority to rooting out corruption. Most people were still taken by surprise by the sacking last month of Shanghai party secretary Chen Liangyu and other top city officials. They have been accused of using the city's 10 billion yuan pension fund for illegal loans to connected parties. Now investigators from Beijing are looking into the activities of top Shanghai property developers.

There is considerable interest in how the Shanghai probe into pension-fund dealings led to the sacking of outspoken National Bureau of Statistics director Qiu Xiaohua , and the detention of the man credited with bringing Formula One grand prix racing to Shanghai, Yu Zhifei .

These events have been overtaken, however, by the arrest of five judges of the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court in a bribery scandal said to highlight systemic corruption in the mainland's legal system and public contempt for it and resentment of it.

A vice-president of the court and four other senior judges are accused of accepting bribes and indulging in decadent lifestyles. The five were allegedly prepared to hand down favourable verdicts for those prepared to pay. More worrying, they have been described as only "the tip of an iceberg" of judicial corruption. Indeed, Supreme People's Court president Xiao Yang describes judicial corruption as rampant and says senior court officials need to be kept under "close supervision".

This deplorable state of affairs goes to the heart of the Communist Party's professed goal of developing a legal system based on the rule of law. This newspaper has argued that senior party cadres still wield too much discretionary power - over all manner of things from land zoning to bank lending - and that they are therefore prone to corruption. So long as they remain above the law, rather than subject to the rule of law, official corruption will continue to undermine the party's moral authority.

A first step towards promoting the rule of law would be to tighten the rules governing exercise of administrative power, reduce the scope for discretion, and make it subject to clear lines of accountability and transparency.

The party cannot put off forever a choice between a free media which exposes corruption and a controlled media which covers it up. That will be a test of its faith in its right to rule.

The party leadership has pledged to fight corruption and strive for social harmony. But success will depend on the taking of concrete steps to free up the media, limit the discretionary power of officials, and build a system under which everyone is subject to the rule of law - including the party.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZ8N9R9CRE.html[/url]

Monday, October 23, 2006

GLOBAL INFLUENCE
China's great African gambit


SANOU MBAYE
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Ever since the Berlin conference of 1883, which Belgium's King Leopold II called "the sharing of Africa's cake", the west has assumed exclusive rights over sub-Saharan Africa. While centuries of struggle to end colonial rule and apartheid have not changed this much, now western influence is being challenged by China, which likewise covets the region's minerals and resources.
China is winning goodwill across the continent by tapping into shared anti-colonial resentments - and by treating Africa seriously. Next month's meeting of the China-Africa Co-operation Forum, established to promote trade and investment, will include 46 African heads of state, along with China's leaders. In any case, President Hu Jintao , Vice-President Zeng Qinghong and Premier Wen Jiabao visit the continent regularly.


Mainland China's moves to strengthen ties have three objectives: to consolidate secure energy and mineral supplies; to curtail Taiwan's influence on the continent (which harbours six of the 26 countries with which it maintains full diplomatic relations); and to augment Beijing's burgeoning global authority.

China has invested billions of dollars in African oil production, mining, transport, electricity production and transmission, telecommunications, and other infrastructure. In 2004 alone, its foreign direct investment in Africa represented US$900 million of the continent's US$15 billion total.

Trade figures tell a similar story. Sino-African trade grew by 700 per cent during the 1990s, doubled from 2000 to 2003 - to US$18.5 billion - then jumped to US$32.2 billion in the first 10 months of last year. While trade and investment ties with China helped boost the continent's overall economic growth to a record high of 5.2 per cent last year, China also cancelled US$10 billion in debts from African countries.

Yet closer relations have brought controversy. African countries have become large buyers of Chinese weapons and military equipment. In so unstable a continent, one saturated with weaponry, pouring in more guns is hardly welcome. As Deputy Foreign Minister Zhou Wenzhong put it: "Business is business, and China separates business from politics."

Of perhaps greater long-term worry is the support Beijing provides for Africa's authoritarian rulers. Economic growth without social justice merely prolongs the denial of decent living conditions to the majority of Africa's people for the benefit of a minority.

The fact China, within a decade, has overhauled Africa's balance of power - relegating the US and Britain to third and fourth, respectively - and is challenging France for first place as the continent's main economic and commercial partner, has irked competitors.

France has stepped up its monitoring of China's African activities. To tie Europe closer to Africa, British Prime Minister Tony Blair even proposed eliminating the European Union's agricultural subsidies under the Common Agricultural Policy.

Africa is the world's only remaining "soft target", where outside powers can battle it out for access to mineral resources. But the last thing Africa needs is to be an economic and political battleground. Africans know from past experience that countries have no friends, only interests.

The ongoing Darfur conflict illustrates the problem. Despite its declared commitment to non-interference, China's interests in Sudanese oil imply otherwise. Thus, Beijing threatens to veto any resolution in the UN Security Council that might impose sanctions against the Arab ruling class.

Until Beijing sees its economic interests as tied to political development, Africa's economy may grow but Africans will continue to suffer.

Sanou Mbaye is a Senegalese economist and a former member of the African Development Bank senior management. Copyright: Project Syndicate



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZHHZO9CRE.html[/url]

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

SHANGHAI
Year of the baby


BILL SAVADOVE
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   An unusual combination of factors has Shanghai heading for a baby boom. Thecurrent year in the lunar calendar is auspicious for weddings, while next year is auspicious for having babies. The surge in new families is also being fuelled by growing wealth, a relaxation of strict family planning policies and an influx of migrants.
There's some debate about next year in the lunar calendar. The media and wedding companies say it will be a Year of the "Golden Pig" - or a Year of the Pig under the influence of gold - which comes around only once in 60 years. It's seen as a good time to have offspring. Some fortune-tellers disagree, saying it's actually a Year of the Pig under the influence of fire.

  
But such doubts haven't stopped women like Jessie Yang, who got married this month. "I want to have a baby next year because many people said it will be the Golden-Pig year, which is auspicious for new babies. A `Golden Pig baby' sounds lovely, doesn't it?" she said.

Whatever the element, such as fire or gold, babies born in the Year of the Pig are supposed to lead lucky and comfortable lives. That is because the namesake animal never worries about anything beyond food and sleep, an elderly Shanghai resident explained. She said simple people can enjoy a simple kind of happiness. The newly married Ms Yang does have one concern, however: the expense of raising a child. "I'm just afraid prices for baby products will rise. Wedding charges are much higher this year, since too many people are marrying," she said.

Shanghai allows couples to have two babies, if both parents were only-children. Now the biggest deterrent is usually the perceived cost of raising two youngsters. Other couples can have a second child if they pay a fine of around 56,000 yuan. But that sum pales in comparison to the cost of raising an extra youngster. Shanghai people are different from much of the country when it comes to children. For example, they are more accepting of having daughters, in contrast to the traditional preference for sons. This is partly because of the perception that daughters do a better job of taking care of elderly parents.


The newest sign of status in Shanghai isn't driving a foreign car or owning a luxury property. The best way to flaunt your wealth these days is to appear in public with two children, showing the world that you can afford to raise them.

The Shanghai Population and Family Planning Commission is forecasting 137,000 births next year, up from an estimated 131,000 this year. The commission had originally predicted 127,000 births this year, but increased its estimate because migrant workers were having more babies than expected.

Shanghai's birth rate is expected to peak at 160,000 in 2015. But let's not be hasty: when, exactly, is that next Year of the Golden Pig?


[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZFSY9QLTE.html[/url]

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

CUTTING INDUSTRIAL EMISSIONS
A Marshall Plan for global warming


MARGO THORNING
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   The heat-trapping gases that are a necessary byproduct of economic activity pose difficult policy challenges for the world's leading economies. Government finance and environment ministers are increasingly concerned with what seems an intractable problem: how to reduce greenhouse gases without sacrificing economic growth. But closer inspection reveals that challenge to be an opportunity.
Consider China and India. The governments of both countries are keen to set their economies on the path to robust growth. Doing so would alleviate poverty and provide opportunities for their citizens. But that growth necessarily means increased energy use and rapidly rising emissions levels.


Meanwhile, some major developed countries have had mixed results in their efforts to cut emissions of heat-trapping gases. As the Associated Press reported this month, "the world's big industrialised nations are struggling to meet the greenhouse-gas reductions they committed to in the embattled Kyoto pact on climate change". They are finding it difficult to make severe cuts in the face of concerns over lost jobs and lowered productivity.

"Europe is veering off course", the news report concluded, "Japan is still far from its target and Canada has given up". The European Environmental Agency predicts that 12 of the 15 original EU member states will fail to meet their Kyoto targets for 2010. Understanding that failure would help officials in both the developed and developing worlds take the necessary steps to slow the growth of emissions.

One sensible, and politically achievable, way forward is the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (AP6). This initiative of six partners - the United States, China, India, Japan, South Korea and Australia - accounts for almost 50 per cent of the global population and more than 50 per cent of the planet's man-made greenhouse-gas emissions. The partners are aware that developing nations will account for the greatest growth in emissions over the next two generations. So, sensible efforts to reduce future emissions will focus on market mechanisms that transfer clean technology to the developing world.

China and India have relatively high emissions intensities: that means their greenhouse-gas emissions per dollar of economic output are much higher than in the US, Europe, Australia, Japan or South Korea. This is true for other developing countries as well.

The technology used by Chinese industry, for example, emits four times more greenhouse gases than a comparable amount of economic output in the US, on average. China is gradually getting cleaner, but even the new technology it introduces has twice the emissions intensity of new processes in the US. Meanwhile, India is lagging behind in emissions intensity, and new Indian investments are frequently as inefficient as their legacy industrial stock.

Lowering the emissions intensity of developing countries to levels found in new investments in the US would nearly achieve the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, according to analysis conducted for the International Council for Capital Formation think-tank.

Getting developing nations to adopt the newest technologies will require initiative and vision from government officials. Promoting a favourable investment climate, for example, is a key requirement. Beijing and New Delhi have already taken farsighted steps to do that. But more could be done to minimise corruption and regulatory burdens, establish the rule of law and recognise intellectual property rights.

But AP6 and other efforts like it cannot succeed without sustained efforts from the business sector. Governments will only act when they are confident that foreign direct investment is likely to take place in the wake of politically risky reforms. This is why there is such a significant role to be played by firms from developed nations that are already present in China and India, and are familiar with the legal, political and economic terrain.


It's helpful to recall the success of the Marshall Plan. After the second world war, European governments pledged various actions - with money provided by the US government, working in concert with business interests. When Europeans made good on those pledges, the plan was extended and broadened.

AP6 could operate similarly. China and India want certain actions from Australia, Japan, South Korea and the US. Those could be made contingent on Beijing and New Delhi's success on implementing certain near-term reforms.


This is a win-win situation rarely possible in public diplomacy. The beneficiaries will be the economies and environments of all involved.

Margo Thorning is managing director of the International Council for Capital Formation.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZD5K8QLTE.html[/url]

¦^´_ #98 ¤j¥Ð­^©ú ªº©«¤l

THANK YOU VERY MUCH

Thursday, October 26, 2006

CHIEF EXECUTIVE ELECTION
The pro-democrats' dilemma


JOSEPH CHENG
   
Prev. Story | Next Story



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   There are different views within the pro-democracy movement on taking part in the coming chief executive election. There are essentially three lines of thinking.
The first is strong opposition to involvement in what critics call "small-circle" elections. The second position is a pragmatic view that not participating next year would probably be the most advantageous approach for the pro- democracy movement. The third line favours wholehearted participation, because it would offer people a choice and pressure the chief executive to present a detailed platform - strengthening accountability.



Those who oppose participation want to uphold principles and reject compromise. Their stand has to be respected.

However, the pro-democracy movement makes compromises every day because of the structure of Hong Kong's politics. For example, of its 25 seats in the Legislative Council, seven come from functional constituencies. The democrats oppose the functional system. Yet, without those seven seats, they would not have one-third of the seats in Legco, and could not have vetoed the Tsang administration's political reform proposal in December.

Competing for functional constituency seats has always been a controversial, contradictory issue in the pro- democracy movement. A majority seems to support participation. Naturally, they want to win these seats. But at the same time, they continue to fight for the abolition of the functional system - while seeking to broaden the electorates of functional constituencies.

Everyone agrees that the pursuit of democracy in Hong Kong has to proceed through legal and peaceful means. This means the pro-democracy movement has to compete within an undemocratic constitutional and electoral framework. But it is meaningless to argue that taking part in the less-than-democratic system will strengthen its legitimacy - or that of the government.

The pragmatic view holds that the present situation is highly unfavourable for the pro-democracy movement. These people think that the re-election of Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen is already a fait accompli. The economy is enjoying an upturn and the government avoids all controversial issues, so it is difficult to challenge Mr Tsang.

They also point out that the movement is divided on the election issue, and that it lacks the resources and organisation to conduct an effective campaign. Some even think that, in the absence of a candidate from the pro-democracy movement, voices opposing Mr Tsang will emerge from within the establishment.

Those who support participation hope it will challenge the limitations of the small-circle election. Competition offers an opportunity for popular participation, and for voicing the people's views, they say.

If the pro-democracy challenger can secure an official nomination by winning the support of 100 Election Committee members, that would create a chance for formal debates with Mr Tsang. But gaining that support remains a formidable challenge. A pro-Beijing united front has apparently been fully mobilised to prevent the nomination of pro-democracy candidates.

Winning votes in the Election Committee, however, is not a significant indicator of how well candidates perform or the appeal of their election campaign. The real test is whether a candidate can do a good job of mobilising the community. If a majority of Hongkongers think there should be competition in the election - and that they should have a chance to indicate which candidate they prefer - then participation by pro-democracy groups will be meaningful.

A lack of resources is a serious challenge for the pro-democracy camp. And attracting media coverage is difficult, given the level of self-censorship. But fighting for democracy in Hong Kong has never been easy.

Joseph Cheng Yu-shek is a professor of political science at City University of Hong Kong.



[url]http://focus.scmp.com/focusnews/ZZZPXGW3PTE.html[/url]