Chinglish by Michael Chugani

2012-11-20

Last week I asked if Hong Kong people were getting value for money by paying our top government officials excessive（more than normal or necessary）salaries. Some readers emailed me to say people are definitely not getting value for money for our excessively-paid（overpaid）officials. I agree. For example, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor earns around $300,000 a month. She lives in a huge mansion on the Peak paid for by taxpayers. And she has a car with a chauffeur （driver） also paid for by taxpayers. What value has she brought to Hong Kong people in return for her huge pay and perks？

        T he word perk has several meanings. When used as a slang word it means special benefits, such as a housing allowance or a car with a driver. Value for money, as I explained last week, means getting good value, or a good deal, for the money you spend. Lam was the development secretary for many years but we still have a shortage of land for affordable housing and people living in subdivided flats. It is easy to conclude （make a decision or judgment） that she was not value for money as our development secretary.

        How can officials understand the needs and thinking of ordinary people when they are given such generous pay and perks？ They live in cloud cuckoo land. This means they live in an imaginary world of their own and are out of touch with reality. Our top officials need to stop living in cloud cuckoo land. They can only do that if their salaries are cut to the level of what officials in other societies earn. We must take away expensive perks such as housing allowances, education allowances for their children, and chauffeur-driven cars. We must force them to pay for their own housing and for their children's education. We must make them use public transport such as the MTR and live for a month in subdivided flats. Only then will they know how it feels to live like normal people.

        * * *

        上星期我問過，到底香港人納稅付一眾政府高官過高（excessive）的薪金，是否物有所值（value for money）？有好些讀者寄電郵給我，說那些薪酬過高（excessively-paid）的官員當然絕非物有所值（value for money）。我很同意。例如，政務司司長林鄭月娥月入三十萬。她住的半山大宅是納稅人付款的。她還有輛私家車，有司機（chauffeur）接送，也是納稅人付款的。她這些龐大的開支與津貼（perks），又為香港人換來甚麼益處？

        Perk有幾個意思，用作俚語時就解作額外津貼，例如房屋津貼或房車和司機。Value for money，正如我上星期解釋過，就是物有所值。林鄭當了多年的發展局局長，但我們仍然缺乏可以用作興建價格相宜房屋的土地，人們還住在劏房裏。那就很容易下定論（to conclude），她當發展局局長根本不是物有所值（value for money）。

        一個享受如此豐厚俸祿和津貼（perks）的官員，怎能明白到普通市民的需要和想法？他們簡直就是住在世外桃源（cloud cuckoo land），住在他們自己想像出來又脫離現實的地方。我們的高官們不應再住在世外桃源（cloud cuckoo land）。只有當他們的薪金與其他地方官員的薪金看齊，他們方能做得到。我們得削減他們那些昂貴的津貼（perks），例如房屋津貼、子女教育津貼和有司機（chauffeur）的房車。我們得強迫他們去為自己的房屋和子女的教育付費。我們得迫使他們用港鐵這些公共交通工具代步，還得住進劏房一個月。只有這樣，他們才明白像普通人一樣的生活是怎樣的滋味。mickchug@gmail.com Michael Chugani

        中譯:七刻

        Michael Chugani 褚簡寧

不要脫離群眾 / 維基解碼 by 王維基

20 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT

　　好多朋友和傳媒都叫我評論一下亞洲電視播放那個叫做《關注香港未來》的節目。礙於我和亞視在免費電視牌照上的關係較為敏感，如果我隨便發表評論，似乎有公器私用的嫌疑。

 

　　但我想指出的是，作為一個媒體，無論是娛樂還是新聞媒體，都必須具公信力。亞視若果因為資源不足，所製作的節目質素較為遜色，大眾都可能會理解和體諒；但若果電視媒體失去了公信力，就好像當年《東周刊》因為一則封面報道最後需要賣盤重新推倒重來一樣，再做下去也沒有意思。

 

　　早幾個月的江澤民死訊誤報事件，然後中聯辦出來否認，已經令亞視的公信力嚴重受挫。他們的管理層一方面營造自己在內地的廣泛人脈，但連一件如此重要的消息都誤報，無論是普通市民還是左派人士，都覺得匪夷所思。

 

　　到現時，我只可以建議亞視，真的不要再出來表態了。我們必需要承認內地和香港的文化差異，這並不代表誰錯誰對，只代表大家的文化是有分別的。

 

　　我們要知道，這個文化差異的鴻溝愈來愈大，這樣做只會令市民和觀眾認清這個電視台的管理層原來這麼脫離群眾，和群眾思想相距甚遠，對電視台並無益處。

 

轉載自晴報