Tsang should allow facts to speak

明報英語網「雙語社評」
english.mingpao.com/critic.htm YESTERDAY Chief Executive Donald Tsang launched a high-profile attack on some media organisations, criticising them for the way they had reported allegations about his compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) policy and the compensation his sister-in-law had got for her investment in a Lehman Brothers product. He used strong words. Nevertheless, however strong it may be, such a reaction will not help ascertain the truth. It would instead intensify the situation. It is totally understandable for him to want to be treated fairly. However, there are reasonable grounds for suspicion about the two affairs. Neither what he says nor what any other invloved in either of them says would dispel it. In our opinion, Tsang should order that all information on the way his CFL policy was formulated be made public. As for the compensation his sister-in-law has received, the bank in question may be asked to disclose the information on her case. To win citizens' trust, Tsang should allow facts to speak.
Most of the legislators disapprove of Tsang's counter-attack on the media. That shows Hong Kong people are very jealous of their freedom of expression and they do not want public opinions to be uniform. Legislators may not approve of some media organisations' ways. What they have done shows what "I don't agree with what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it" truly means. Furthermore, the government has been given to wearing political make-up and is more and more visibly desirous to influence public opinion. Few approve of such behaviour, which actually encroaches on the freedom of speech and that of the press. Now legislators think certain media organisation's ways of handling news stories are to a certain extent "acceptable". That may be their reaction to the government's manipulation of public opinion.
It remains to be seen how the "war" between Tsang and the media will unfold. However, doubts persist about the two affairs he is involved in. The allegations are no smoke without fire, even less fabrications (as he has called them). There are reasonable grounds for suspicion.
For example, whether Tsang meant the CFL policy to profit his son's father-in-law depends on how it was made. He has already announced it. How it was made need not remain secret. The government should make public the information so that citizens will know what role Tsang played in each of the stages of its formulation. If there is no evidence of any desire to "transfer benefit", the matter will end, and there will be nothing about it any reporter or critic can write or talk about.
As for his sister-in-law's compensation, Tsang accused media organisations of acting on unsubstantiated evidence. What Lehman Brothers product did she invest in? Why did she get compensation with the help of lawmaker Abraham Razack when banks were prepared to settle only with Lehman Brothers minibond investors who were senior citizens? These questions are such that one cannot help but suspect Tsang's capacity may have been an influence.
What citizens think about the two affairs depends wholly on facts. If Tsang produces substantiated evidence that he did not mean the CFL policy to profit his son's father-in-law and he had nothing to do with his sister-in-law's compensation, citizens will come to a fair judgement.
Tsang heads the SAR. As lawmaker Regina Ip has said, he ought to be honest and clean - "whiter than white". What one says may not be a fact. People's mouths cannot be stopped otherwise than with substantiated evidence.
明報社評 2009.10.28 猛批傳媒無助澄清真相 曾蔭權最好讓事實說話有關慳電膽和弟婦雷曼產品賠償兩宗事件，行政長官曾蔭權高調反擊個別傳媒的報道處理，措辭嚴厲。不過，無論曾蔭權的回應再強烈，都無助於釐清真相，反而起激化事態的效果。曾蔭權要求得到公平對待，完全可以理解，但是就這兩件事，確有合理懷疑之處，政府、曾蔭權和相關人等僅靠一些說法，不可能完全釋疑。我們認為，就慳電膽事件，曾蔭權應該下令公開決策全過程，至於其弟婦的雷曼產品賠償，則可情商銀行公開相關資料。讓事實說話，以取信於民。
就曾蔭權反擊個別傳媒，證諸立法會內不同黨派議員的反應，大多不予苟同，說明香港人亟亟於維護言論自由，不願見到香港輿論出現千篇一律的情。議員們對於個別傳媒的做法可能不盡贊同，但是他們的表現，充分說明「我雖然不同意你的意見，但是我會誓死保衛你發表意見的權利」的真義。另外，近年政府沉溺於政治化妝，製造輿論愈顯，其蠶蝕新聞自由和言論自由的實質，許多人都不以為然，現在個別傳媒的做法在議員之間獲得一定程度「接受」，可能是對政府操控傳媒的反彈。
曾蔭權與個別傳媒之間的「戰事」如何演變下去，且待觀察，不過，迄今他所涉及的兩件事疑團未釋，並非無風起浪，更絕非他所說的「無中生有」，而是有合理懷疑之處。
例如慳電膽事件，曾蔭權是否有圖利姻親，關鍵在於決策過程。基於此事已經公開，決策過程再無秘密可言，有關文件和資料應該可以公開，讓市民審視由醞釀到建議到結論到拍板整個過程，曾蔭權在各個階段的角色，清楚呈現出來後，若不涉利益輸送，事件就終結，傳媒和輿論就沒有文章可做了。
至於曾蔭權弟婦的雷曼產品賠償事件，他批評個別傳媒「捕風捉影」，但是，他的弟婦涉及的是雷曼哪一種產品？為何在銀行只與老弱迷債事主和解之時，他的弟婦在立法會議員石禮謙在協助下可以得到賠償？這些問題，不無使人有「曾蔭權的身分和角色」在起作用聯想。
市民的取態完全取決於事態真相，若曾蔭權拿出有確實資料支持的事實，證明並無給姻親利益輸送，與弟婦的雷曼產品賠償無關，則市民就會有公正的評斷。
曾蔭權是特區之首，他的誠信和操守正如立法會議員葉劉淑儀所說，應該「比白紙更白」。事實是什麼，不能口講便了，要拿出真憑實據才能堵塞悠悠之口。
Glossary
encroach /In'krt/ intrude (especially on another's territory or rights).
unfold /n'fld/ develop.
influence
a thing (or person) that affects the way a person (or another) behaves or thinks.
每周一音標
《明報英語網》逢星期二推出「每周一音標」，以視像短片模式教授國際音標，真人發音，歡迎瀏覽網址﹕english.mingpao.com