香港 Xocat Forum 討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 不理解的荒謬 - 送議席 [打印本頁]

作者: KMY89 時間: 2008-9-1 17:35 標題: 不理解的荒謬 - 送議席

功能組別 - 會計

龔耀輝、譚香文 - 泛民
陳茂波 - 建制

如泛民退出一個，集中票源對建制便會贏，為什麼一定要鬥？把議席雙手奉送建制？

與其說蛇宴海鮮團 ... 賴三賴四 ...

事實上是敗在私心太重，一盤散沙 ....

[ 本帖最後由 KMY89 於 2008-9-1 18:19 編輯 ]

作者: Rubber 時間: 2008-9-1 17:43

甘乃威讓路與陳太, 咩又俾人話.

無所謂嘅, 以前臺灣國親兩黨, 最後又變成泛藍, 一定要經過數次磨合.

作者: KMY89 時間: 2008-9-1 17:47

引用:

原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-9-1 17:43 發表
甘乃威讓路與陳太, 咩又俾人話.

無所謂嘅, 以前臺灣國親兩黨, 最後又變成泛藍, 一定要經過數次磨合.

甘乃威先讓余若薇、再讓陳太 ...

今次上場 Audrey 和陳太半句好話都無幫佢講 ....

真係 ...

作者: Rubber 時間: 2008-9-1 18:06

引用:

原帖由 KMY89 於 2008-9-1 17:47 發表

甘乃威先讓余若薇、再讓陳太 ...

今次上場 Audrey 和陳太半句好話都無幫佢講 ....

真係 ...

陳太都擺都明幫公民黨..
民主黨政冶包伏太大, 班友又無乜識見.. 都係時侯汰弱留強

作者: KMY89 時間: 2008-9-1 18:09

引用:

原帖由 Rubber 於 2008-9-1 18:06 發表

陳太都擺都明幫公民黨..
民主黨政冶包伏太大, 班友又無乜識見.. 都係時侯汰弱留強

加入民建聯就有出路 lor ...

歡迎歡迎 ... 熱烈歡迎 ...

作者: peninsula 時間: 2008-9-1 20:16

引用:

原帖由 KMY89 於 2008-9-1 17:35 發表
功能組別 - 會計 ...

Should be close!

作者: kcpw0n 時間: 2008-9-1 21:04

引用:

原帖由 KMY89 於 2008-9-1 17:35 發表
功能組別 - 會計

龔耀輝、譚香文 - 泛民
陳茂波 - 建制

如泛民退出一個，集中票源對建制便會贏，為什麼一定要鬥？把議席雙手奉送建制？

與其說蛇宴海鮮團 ... 賴三賴四 ...

事實上是敗在私心太重，一 ...

搶位奪選票就會,
讓路~~~
誰讓誰呀?
民主民主?????
是誰為主
是誰作主
權位之爭是你死我活之爭
不死不休

作者: breatharian 時間: 2008-9-2 09:09

引用:

原帖由 KMY89 於 2008-9-1 17:47 發表

甘乃威先讓余若薇、再讓陳太 ...

今次上場 Audrey 和陳太半句好話都無幫佢講 ....

真係 ...

呢屆選舉公民黨既私心已經表露晒出黎

譚香文連咁既野都做得出, 難怪要出選功能組別
August 4, 2008
Mr. Albert Au
President
Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants
37/F Wu Chung House
213 Queen's Road East
Wanchai, Hong Kong

Dear Mr. Au
Your Conflict of Interest and Violation of Independence by the Institute
I read from the press on July 30 that you responded to my letter on July 28 by agreeing to step down as Chairman of the Election Forums (hereinafter “Chairman”), in view of the conflict of interest arising from your nomination of Paul Chan.
However, there were mixed messages following your stepping down during last week, which could be highlighted as follows:
1) Ronald Kung said your nomination is unacceptable. (Exhibit 3.1)
2) You said the Council has accepted your intended nomination of Paul Chan beforehand. (Exhibit 3.2)
In addition to press coverage, I also understand that some members have written a letter, the draft of which as posted in the HKEJ (Exhibit 1), on or around July 30, to Winnie Cheung, urging her as CEO of “the Institute to take immediate steps to avert the developing negative view about the profession and the Institute from this matter”.
The CEO in her email letter reply dated July 31, as posted in the HKEJ forum (Exhibit 2), made the following points:
a) The CEO denied the request by not addressing it. Instead she reiterated an adopted policy of political neutrality.
b) She further explained that President has the same right as any member.
c) Her conclusion is “The Institute, by law, cannot interfere with those rights or take those rights away.”
It is evident that the CEO has missed the point completely. The main complaint was to ask for remedial actions (to clear the reputation of the Institute) in relation to its failure of performance of its statutory “duty to preserve and maintain its reputation, integrity and status (Professional Accountants Ordinance, section 7(g)) of the profession”. She seems to be mixing up a duty of the Institute with that of you personally.
Rather than examining the issue from the point of “rights” of a member, I am more interested to examine the same issue from the point of “duties” of the Institute and its officers. This examination can be tested by the following questions:
1) As President of the Institute, is there a duty for you in a personal capacity to act in an independent manner, and is there also a duty for you to act in the official capacity in an independent manner? There are two meanings to acting in an independent manner: (a) To actually act without any conflict of interest, or (b) To prevent or avoid from acting in any manner to bring yourself or the Institute into the question of actual, suspected or perceived conflict of interest.
2) Are you aware that by holding the Chairman office (announced on July 15) there will be conflict of interest for you to nominate any candidate afterwards?
3) Does Winnie Cheung, the CEO, have a duty to keep the Institute from actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest? That is, she should have either advised you not to nominate Paul Chan, or advised you to step down as Chairman the moment you nominated Paul Chan. Therefore, has the CEO by negligence or by construction allowed the Institute to be drawn into the question of independence?
4) What has been the role of the Council in the nomination? Has your intended nomination actually been discussed? Did the Council endorse it? Did the Council advise you on the conflict of interest?
Your answers to the questions above will help in the final analysis, whether it is the case that you personally ignored all advices and ignored the conflict of interest situation during the period you were holding the office as the Chairman from July 15 to July 29? It is noted that Paul Chan submitted his registration for candidacy on July 21. Alternatively, are other officers of the Institute responsible?
As possible remedial actions, would you consider withdrawing your nomination of Paul Chan immediately, or would you consider taking personal responsibility for drawing the Institute into disrepute for the violation of Independence or the political neutrality policy? Perhaps you have other suggestions?
I very much look forward to your clarifications, which will be very helpful in dispelling or confirming the suspicions now found among members and in the public.
Yours sincerely,
TAM Heung Man, Mandy
Encl: Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Cc: Winnie Cheung, CEO
Press
EXHIBIT 1
Members’ Complaint to Winnie Cheung
July 30, 2008

Ms Winnie Cheung
Chief Executive and Registrar
Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants
37/F Wu Chung House
213 Queen's Road East
Wanchai, Hong Kong
Dear Winnie
I am a member of the Institute. I am writing to express a few of my concerns about the recent negative publicity about the profession and the Institute.
First of all, I welcome the Institute's effort in promoting members' awareness in this September's Legislative Council Election. In particular, being one of the largest functional constituencies, we should demonstrate to the general public that we care about our society and we want to contribute to it by electing our representative which shall uphold the core values of accountants. However, I am disappointed about the recent publicity that our President is supporting one of the candidates by personal nomination.
Initially, the argument for it seems standing as it is just a personal nomination after all. However, being the President of the Institute, the only statutory body of the accountancy profession in Hong Kong and only its members are eligible to become registered voters in the Accountancy Constituency, he should maintain objectivity and professional behavior as stipulated in our widely embraced Code of Ethics Sections 120 and 150, as follows:
"120.1 The principle of objectivity imposes an obligation on all professional accountants
not to compromise their professional or business judgment because of bias, conflict
of interest or the undue influence of others.
120.2 A professional accountant may be exposed to situations that may impair objectivity.
It is impracticable to define and prescribe all such situations. Relationships that
bias or unduly influence the professional judgment of the professional accountant
should be avoided."
"150.1 The principle of professional behaviour imposes an obligation on professional
accountants to comply with relevant laws and regulations and avoid any action that
may bring discredit to the profession. This includes actions which a reasonable and
informed third party, having knowledge of all relevant information, would conclude
negatively affects the good reputation of the profession."
The above excerpts, which both the President and your goodself must be very familiar with, remind us that we should never fail to observe these principles, in whatever circumstances or our pillars will be rotten and our profession will never stand in good stead.
Now there are complaints from certain members that the President is biasing towards a particular candidate of this election. And obviously the general public is forming its own impression about the profession from this alleged bias practice. While the Institute may not be able to prevent individuals in the public from forming such a negative impression about the profession, the Institute should have the duty to preserve and maintain its reputation, integrity and status (Professional Accountants Ordinance, section 7(g)) of the profession if this is becoming a general view.
As a member, I demand the Institute to take immediate steps to avert the developing negative view about the profession and the Institute from this matter. A further review about its governance and powers of President of the Institute may be considered necessary in the future.
I thank the Institute in rebuilding the reputation of accountants all these years but one such slip in the conduct of the Institute's matters would have failed all the hearty efforts contributed by our fellow accountants in the past, no matter how well they have done.
I look forward to a formal answer to my concerns. Otherwise, I may join other members to request an EGM to be held and let the President become accountable to all members.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Yours sincerely,
A HKICPA member (name as shown in my email address)

[ 本帖最後由 breatharian 於 2008-9-2 09:14 編輯 ]

作者: 分身人 時間: 2008-9-2 09:59

功能組別都要攪內部團結, 那麼選來還有什麼作用
穩拿???那為什麼有獨立人仕能在別組拿呢張入場券
什麼是功能組別, 本身就係一個笑話

作者: 分身人 時間: 2008-9-2 10:05