• |
  • 極速報價
  • |
  • etnet專輯
    etnet專輯
  • 會員
  • 產品服務 / 串流版
  • 設定
過往專欄
心筆在妍
教材攻略。學得要精趣味投資法暢所欲妍HR唔易做辦公室政治論盡中港台時事要聞圖窮秘現中環人金錢世界呈分試 你要知小事大意義全城聚焦點政•漫料理NatFix我家私房菜素心Cook心理攻防戰綠路閑人好書看多點Pris形象教室形象UP!保哥快趣煮Green Monday看透生死親子語我要初創政策.正察跳躍中國時空筆記留心站財玄廣進點歷史看真點時勢造網紅Online有話兒DR-Max 一點就明Bella vita 美好生活iMoney 熱點Talk Of The Town活得健康點親子芬享不藥而癒人生燦爛點凱文隨筆尋寶島盛衰關鍵國金與投資留給囝囝IC理財打工秘笈樂活人生SME 解密「港」創業‧談管理心靈加油站「男」言之隱滾蛋吧,腫瘤花生味辦公室健康透視抗癌煮意知‧解醫學創業兵團匯對達人容我細說言歸政傳政經頑石不低頭為理發聲郎旋風薰香療法男士診症室抵玩自助遊句句有骨星座命理念力•氣功手機應用tips睛益求精嚴浩 LIKE!見微知著跟著陶冬找美食數碼潮人廣告有晴踏出退休第一步識食•惜食有種CEO叫做莊潮爆網事羅湖橋兩邊娛樂酷辣辣思歪思正十萬八千里樂本健‧教室特首選舉趣食60秒入廚101觀自然•觀香港有種生活政本清源心筆在妍維基解碼IT戰國誌煮酒論政今日趣聞馬壇.誌趣星期二周融愛瘋Apps美美道來大國崛起智醒日誌@中小企「營」刃而解Smart Buying甜品工房Education Calculator家事法庭升學信箱新手媽媽怪獸父母營營樂樂親子專題財富非常道謝國忠看勢獨唱團京城近觀原來如此乾坤挪移街坊食神Keyman森巴舞睇波LU文化導遊精神解碼抗癌兵團有營生活吾道崢廣見聞名家名畫商務英語型品薈我心中的米芝蓮歐洲直擊旅途中食得喜Leadership Coaching一哥教攝影心晴百態乳你同行專科專論人愛衣裝Word Discovery科技趨勢愛情故事投資達人政治擂台藝術投資秘笈抗癌點滴寵物情緣淘寶lization電影一線網絡鬼故主.管微博一分鐘管理娛樂有理進攻SAT古今名錶政‧經‧女人The Beauty Factor議會內外石油戰爭男女情色談金說匯風水環境學細味建築Green Hong Kong星光伴我行我吃過的米芝蓮A+孩子上海觀察京城札記鐵娘駕到食客三千創富新思維海外升學信箱Today's Web藝術投資世界在讀什麼-雷美華潮得起Business English飛越地球村紅酒情報職場物語股場琦手鑽石媒人Mei Ling好愛情‧壞愛情性治療師手記名牌女王嶺南人語醫美正當時黃金時代醫美正當時一份好工美麗不妥協上班纏下班逅

14/09/2015

議員水平實堪憂

  那天電視新聞報了一則立法會裏的小風波,自由黨議員張宇人決定參選,競逐內務委員會主席一職,挑戰同屬建制派的現任主席——經民聯的梁君彥。

 

  同室操戈,建制派當然有話說,更可笑的是,泛民召集人何秀蘭的回應,她說了兩個原因,「證明」張宇人好過梁君彥,因為:一、張宇人常常自嘲,以輕鬆笑話讓緊張的議事氣氛化干戈為玉帛;二、梁君彥經常輕易趕泛民議員離場。

 

  只能嘆句:低水平啊,這是甚麼議員?

 

  第一、如果喜歡聽自嘲笑話,你應該選黃子華而不是張宇人;第二、如果因為梁君彥愛趕泛民議員走你就不選他,那是私怨,一個主張民主選舉的人,原來只會以私怨作選舉標準,恐怖啊!況且你不會不知道為甚麼主席要把你的同伴趕走吧?因為你們謾罵、叫囂、粗言、擲物、不守規則……全香港市民都看到,還怪別人?正如學生老是怪責老師罰人,卻從來沒有告訴別人老師為甚麼要罰你。

 

  我不認識梁君彥、張宇人,我不知道一個立法會的內務委員會主席需要具備甚麼能力,但肯定不會是講笑話和趕人離場。何議員要代表泛民對這兩位競逐者作出評價,煩請說點智慧話,評評他們的工作能力和領導手法。

 

  連津貼有十幾萬一個月的高薪,原來奉養著一個個低水平腦袋,香港豈能不死?

 

轉載自: 晴報

 

 《經濟通》所刊的署名及/或不署名文章,相關內容屬作者個人意見,並不代表《經濟通》立場,《經濟通》所扮演的角色是提供一個自由言論平台。

etnet香港好去處推出小紅書版!立即追蹤@通仔GoGoGo 以獲取最新情報!► 即睇詳情

我要回應105

版主留言

我要回應

登入

發表回應

登記

成為新會員

回應只代表會員個人觀點,不代表經濟通立場

  • 只看作者回應
  • 查看全部回應
  • 順序
  • 倒序
  • GLComment發表於 2015-9-19 11:07 AM
  • #106
  • 黃子華 不是立法會議員, 點選佢做 委員會主席呀 白痴!

    每人 對事物 有不同看法, 作為委員, 可能有人喜歡 1 個 嚴肅 的做主席, 亦可能 有人會選擇 懂得 緩和 氣氛 的人做主席, 有乜問題 !

    無野都要吠一餐...正一癲狗 !
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 靚姐發表於 2015-9-15 09:29 AM
  • #105
  • Thatcher 真正是個具有眼光的聰明人。 這現象愈來愈明顯。

  • 引用 #94 hongkonger 發表於 2015-9-14 09:10 PM

    “To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policie ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 笑哈哈發表於 2015-9-14 11:03 PM
  • #104
  • 回覆 #102 ctang8


    呢個已經係另外一個問題同論點, 我只不過係應你嘅要求去回應啊John嘅論點.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 10:25 PM
  • #103
  • 回覆 #98 笑哈哈


    Your entire argument is focused on Ho's rationale on preferring an more friendly and open-minded leader.

    I think the real focus should be: 1) how is Ho's preference makes her such a bad LEGCO member; 2) how can this mode of thinking be influential enough to cause the HK's downfall?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 10:07 PM
  • #100
  • 回覆 #96 笑哈哈


    If a good atmosphere and a good relationship will not facilitate agreement, what can?
    Dictatorship? Conversely, how evicting people from meeting helps in forming consensus?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 笑哈哈發表於 2015-9-14 09:30 PM
  • #99
  • 回覆 #93 ctang8


    個個人都想向好處諗, 都想搵個好人選. 屈小姐對何秀蘭嘅批評我唔覺得有問題, 佢因為張宇人識自嘲就話佢好, 但正如我所講, 識自嘲只能夠令氣氛好啲, 對能達成妥協係無幫助. 趕人出場就話唔好, 問題係點解要趕佢?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 笑哈哈發表於 2015-9-14 09:28 PM
  • #98
  • 回覆 #92 ctang8


    點會無制衡, 如果特首真係有問題, 唔洗啲議員出聲, 啲傳媒都唔會同佢客氣, 只要啲議員一開記招, 就全世界都知, 無定走.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 笑哈哈發表於 2015-9-14 09:27 PM
  • #97
  • 回覆 #91 ctang8


    首先, 依家係你質疑我嘅講法, 係你要求我去講出佢嘅邏輯有乜問題, 我自然就係要向你作回應. 依家係佢唔敢面對我嘅挑戰, 如果唔係佢應該一早出嚟反駁我. 你更加唔應該話等緊聽我嘅回應而唔係佢話.

    如果嗰啲議員係正正常常咁發言, 我唔覺得嗰啲乜乜內會主席會趕佢走, 趕佢走嘅目的係要維持議會嘅秩序同保持會議可暢順進行, 同壓制其他人嘅意見無關.
    唔明點解你要拉埋CY落水, 唔通上二屆就完全無撕裂嘅現象咩, 只不過佢地無咁強硬, 撕裂嘅現象就無咁明顯, 但就變成弱勢政府, 俾啲議員惡哂.
    但你講啲啲根本就同我講嘅重點無關 : 自嘲係唔能夠縮窄分歧同達成妥協.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2015-9-14 09:12 PM
  • #96
  • “If you just set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.”
    ---Margaret Thatcher
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • hongkonger發表於 2015-9-14 09:10 PM
  • #95
  • “To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.”
    ---Margaret Thatcher
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 08:07 PM
  • #94
  • 回覆 #88 笑哈哈


    I disagree. Personality traits of a good leader is well-known to a lot of people including me. It is basic management knowledge. If Wut is criticizing people's criteria in choosing a chairman of a LEGCO committee, she better knows what it takes to be a greater leader. Able to create a cooperative atmosphere for discussion and tolerance of opposition are certainly good traits for a leader.

    I know that John has patiently lay out the logics in certain level of details. If it is beyond your patience or ability, I can understand that.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 08:00 PM
  • #93
  • 回覆 #84 笑哈哈


    Yes, I agree. I have not said that there are no bad members in the LEGCO. I ask people who voted for them and they said there is no function anyway of a LEGCO member especially those are not pro-establishment. Therefore, they voted for ones who have the biggest voice. Whose fault is that in crippling a proper functioning of legalative members?

    You probably do not know the process. The chief executive has immunity during his terms. I am afraid that we can do nothing to him even though we know he is a crook. Impeachment is the only way but it was voted dowm because of the unfair composition of LEGCO seats.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 07:50 PM
  • #92
  • 1) the personality of the leader is important to craft the atmosphere for conflicts or cooperation. For example, if the leader always shoot down the opinions of one camp, what will happen? See example of 689. Is the split unprecedented when compared it with those in Tsang's and Tung's time?

    2) If the leader is lobsided, inbalance is inevitable. He will not give enough consideration of opinions of opposite side and even shoot down whoever raising the opposite view. It is human nature. Evicting people from a people is suppressing his voice for the rest of the meeting.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 07:39 PM
  • #91
  • 回覆 #88 笑哈哈


    First question, why you refer your response to me? You cannot face John's challenges?
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 港人講事發表於 2015-9-14 07:32 PM
  • #90
  • 其實,多年來都己經係咁,有一些政治人物,立法局議員,一見到佢哋出鏡,都係對人不對事,潑婦駡街式的駡人,並不講任何理據,無他,為反對而反對嘛。
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 笑哈哈發表於 2015-9-14 07:15 PM
  • #89
  • 回覆 #81 ctang8


    至於最後二點 :

    - Ms. Wut seems very foreign to some leadership traits that are coducive to success functioning of an organization.
    - Ms. Wut is very superficial & doesn't bother to dig deeper why legislators resort to those behavior. For her, form is more important than subs

    只不過係佢對屈小姐嘅個人睇法或指控, 根本就無提出任何證據或例證去說明, 換句話講, 就係齋嗡, 純粹係為左攻擊而攻擊.

    以上嘅回應, 只此一次, 根本無人有咁多時間同佢咁磨法, 佢啲又長又臭嘅長篇大論係人都怕左佢. 得閒嘅時候搵佢嚟開心下都唔錯嘅.

    咁依家你又有乜回應呢下.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • ctang8發表於 2015-9-14 07:09 PM
  • #88
  • Yes, your studodity gives me a lot of laughters.

    I have never come across anyone who claimed to be a graduate but having no ability in logical thinking or in English. Your shamelessness is so unique that classify you to be a freak. And people pay money to see a freak show.

  • 引用 #85 Freemanchina 發表於 2015-9-14 06:54 PM

    Amina, Whether you are emotionally calm is sujbect to my further testing. If you are able to ma ...
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 吡吡發表於 2015-9-14 07:03 PM
  • #87
  • John's logic,實體同德國人希特勒,評猶太人嘅假邏輯一樣,錯亂之間,只有愚蠢可以代替佢地反省。
    過去只識放高利貸嘅猶太人,以為錢可以買到妓女嘅陰道任由自己精子進出,而自己母親條通道,亦可以讓父親嘅價值觀觀察完再自由進出,因此,既然普通常識真係咁世界一樣,所以妓女就係等同自己母親;又或自己放高利貸害到人家破人亡個衰樣,即係農夫養雞,可以任其屠宰嘅一樣,所以任有錢佬屠宰嘅人,同任人屠宰嘅雞一樣,乜惡果都有前因架,假邏輯自己造成嘅惡果有幾可怕,番查下歷史啦,練發夢功真係幫唔到啲弱漢。
    當然,弱漢異形冇當年德國人希特勒咁把炮,睇出現居美國嘅猶太人假邏輯,係專好害人筆錢,但思維一樣,後果可以好嚴重,都係自己攞黎!

  • 引用 #81 ctang8 發表於 2015-9-14 06:29 PM

    回覆 笑哈哈 Don't leave so soon. I am all ear for your repudiation of John's logic. Hahaha.
  • 回覆 | 引用 | 舉報
  • 只看作者回應
  • 查看全部回應
  • 順序
  • 倒序
最緊要健康
精選文章
  • 生活
  • DIVA
  • 健康好人生
專業版
HV2
精裝版
SV2
串流版
IQ 登入
強化版
TQ
強化版
MQ