We unveiled our Green Plan 2030 last month. Yesterday in Parliament, Teo Chee Hean, Grace Fu, Desmond Lee, Lawrence Wong, Ong Ye Kung, Tan See Leng, and Chan Chun Sing described how their Ministries plan to keep Singapore green and sustainable.
We’ve set ambitious Whole-of-nation targets. The public sector is taking the lead, setting a carbon emissions target for the first time. We also aim to green 80% of our buildings by 2030.
But the Green Plan is more than a target setting exercise. It is a roadmap to make going green an intrinsic part of the lives of current and future generations. The Government will lead the way towards this vision, but we need everyone actively on board to make it a reality. I hope you’ll join us!
You can read more about our plans here: http://greenplan.gov.sg
– LHL
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「future plans exercise」的推薦目錄:
- 關於future plans exercise 在 Lee Hsien Loong Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於future plans exercise 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於future plans exercise 在 游蕙禎 Yau Wai Ching Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於future plans exercise 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於future plans exercise 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於future plans exercise 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
future plans exercise 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳解答
【回覆選舉主任 —— 我有權參選 政府無權篩選】
海怡西選區選舉主任馬周佩芬的來信,完全就是政治審查。她在信件要求我解釋自己「如何不違背擁護基本法和確認書」,其實一早已假定我違反要求,並將舉證責任轉嫁到我身上,要求我證明自己擁護基本法。
同時,選舉主任將我所有社區事務的參與都和香港眾志拉上關係,也是難以理解。事實上,投入社區工作是我的個人選擇,與我自己在香港眾志的身份及職務並無關連。
政府以言論篩選候選人的技巧,出神入化。無論如何,我已作了回覆,在此公布答覆全文。
再次重申,我有權參選,政府無權篩選。
-----------------------------------------------
香港香港仔海傍道3號
逸港居1樓
海怡西選區
選舉主任馬周佩芬女士
電郵:ro_s@had.gov.hk
馬周佩芬女士:
就 閣下於2019年10月14日電郵來函,本人謹覆如下:
【問題(i) (a):你是否仍然出任該職?】
本人現時擔任香港眾志秘書長。
【問題(i) (b):如是,你如何不是以香港眾志代表的身分參加是次區議會選舉?】
本人並非以香港眾志代表的身分參加是次區議會選舉。根據香港眾志在2018年5月26日在其網站發表的轉型宣言,香港眾志已不再為政黨,故並不會派員參與各級選舉或競逐任何公職。
我參加區議會選舉的決定,乃經負責民主派協調事宜的民主動力所推薦,競逐海怡西區議會選舉。事實上,我投入地區服務及參加區議會選舉的決定,與本人於香港眾志的身分及職務並無關連。
【問題(i) (c): 無論如何,你是否以香港眾志代表的身分參加是次區議會選舉?】
正如我於上述強調,我並非以香港眾志代表的身份參加是次區議會選舉,我是獲負責民主派協調事宜的民主動力所推薦,競逐海怡西區議會選舉。
無論如何,我投入地區服務及參加區議會選舉的決定,與本人於香港眾志的身分及職務並無關連。
【問題(ii):鑑於你與「香港眾志」的聯繫,請問你是否認同該組織上述有關民主自決的主張?】
正如我於上述強調,我並非以香港眾志代表的身份參加是次區議會選舉,故 閣下在信函所引述附件一及三的內容,以及判斷本人與香港眾志的聯繫,均不適用於考慮本人提名的有效性。同時,我謹澄清, 閣下選擇性地提述有關的內容,並非我所支持「民主自決」的主張的全部。
至於 閣下提述附件二的內容,請參考本人以下的回覆。
【問題(ii)(a):你是否認同香港眾志提倡和支持香港人可以自決前途?】
本人提倡和支持香港人可以自決前途,即香港特別行政區在《中英聯合聲明》基本方針政策於「五十年不變」限期屆滿後的前途問題,應讓香港人共同參與決定。而本人的立場是任何香港未來前途的決定,應在一國兩制的憲政框架內進行。
【問題(ii) (b):你是否認同香港眾志提倡和支持香港獨立是自決前途的選項?】
我不主張香港獨立,而我理解香港眾志所提出的自決前途,並不具實際約束力, 亦不牴觸《基本法》下的憲制及法律地位,和《中英聯合聲明》對香港既定的基本方針政策。《基本法》第十二條列明,香港特別行政區是中華人民共和國的一個享有高度自治權的地方行政區域,直轄於中央人民政府,而自決前途亦是在中華人民共和國的主權下進行。我認為任何成為自決前途選項的主張,其先決條件是擁有相當民意基礎,以符合民主原則。
【問題(ii) (c):如你認同上述有關「民主自決」的主張⋯⋯這如何不違背你在提名表格內所作出關於擁護《基本法》及支持香港特別行政區的聲明?】
我提倡和支持香港人可以自決前途,但這並不違背我在提名表格內所作出關於擁護《基本法》及支持香港特別行政區的聲明。根據周庭的選舉呈請 ([2019] HKCFI 2135),高等法院原訟法庭法官周家明在第38段所述:
“Nevertheless, it would appear from Ms Chow’s Explanation that she only supports what may be described as a water-downed version of the doctrine of self-determination involving the use of a non-binding referendum essentially to forge public opinion and put pressure on the Central People's Government and HKSAR Government when formulating future plans for Hong Kong and Hong Kong people with a view to pushing for a greater degree of autonomy for Hong Kong.”
我就自決前途的看法與周庭所述相同。我亦知悉政府接受周庭案的判決,沒有就周庭案提出上訴。
無論自決前途的結果為何,亦不代表該結果會對中華人民共和國政府或香港政府具有法律約束力,自決前途的作用在於表達香港人的意願,我相信這並不違背《基本法》賦予一國兩制,高度自治的原則。
本人再次表明我從未主張香港獨立,而我必須強調,支持民主自決並不代表支持香港獨立於中華人民共和國中央政府。如我在2017年6月29日在《華盛頓郵報》與李柱銘合撰《Why we fight for Hong Kong's freedoms》的文章指出:
“Let us be clear: Hong Kong people are not challenging Beijing. We are merely insisting that China uphold its pledge to let us freely choose our leaders by universal suffrage and exercise the “high degree of autonomy” we were promised by China.
Above all, China needs to make sure that Hong Kong’s “two systems” survive in order to give the younger generation an incentive to stay and build on our success. Taiwan also continues to watch to see if Beijing’s word can be trusted.”
我謹重申,我並非以香港眾志代表的身份參加是次區議會選舉。正如我於上述強調,我個人對於有關「民主自決」主張的立場,與我在提名表格內所作出關於擁護《基本法》及支持香港特別行政區的聲明並無牴觸。
敦請 閣下儘快就本人於2019年10月4日提交的提名表格,以及就上述問題的答覆,決定本人的提名是否有效。若 閣下需要其他的補充資料,請以電郵聯絡本人。本人就 閣下的查詢保留一切權利。
我有權參選,政府無權篩選。
二零一九年區議會選舉
海怡西選區參選人
黃之鋒
二零一九年十月十五日
—————————
#民主實踐社區開始 #炎夏同行無懼寒冬
💪成為義工:http://bit.ly/joinus-sh
📣參選宣言:http://bit.ly/shw-chi
💬Joshua Wong‘s Manifesto and Policy Platform for 2019 District Council Election:http://bit.ly/shweng
future plans exercise 在 游蕙禎 Yau Wai Ching Facebook 的最讚貼文
11:04 6 Aug: First Ever Press Conference Held by Protesters to Counterweight Gov't PC; Invites People to Join Future PC if Interested
After disappearing from public eye for 11 days, CE Carrie Lam, announced during yesterday's press conference that daily police and government interdepartmental PCs will be held starting from 5 Aug. In the hopes to balance the government's one-sided political discourse, a civil press conference was held today. In response to the statements made by FS Paul Chan yesterday, the speakers stressed that the economic changes in Hong Kong began long before the protests started and that they were mainly the results of external factors such as the stagnating global economy and the current Sino-US trade war.
The speakers strongly condemned the incompetence and negligence of the HKPF and cited incidents in Tseung Kwan O, Sai Wan, Tin Shui Wai, Kwun Tong as examples of excessive use of force. They urged the police to remember the vows and mottos of the HKPF and to exercise restraint in the face of protests. They reiterated the 5 core demands, and particularly emphasised the importance and urgency of dual-universal suffrage. They asked for the government to restore Hong Kong's self-autonomy and respect the people’s right to the freedom of assembly, expression and democracy.
In the Q&A section, when asked about the slogan “Reclaim Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times”, they explained that while activist Edward Leung coined the words in 2016, different individuals or parties (including the government) will have differed interpretations. They hope to involve others in future press conferences to explain their opinions on the slogan itself. The statement made today was constructed with information gathered from Telegram and other platforms over a short period of time. It included views from supplies teams, frontliners, local residents and other participants of the movement. The exact number of people contributed to the statement is unknown, but there were about 100 people who were involved with the PC's preparations today.
The speakers stated that the public should not simply be focused on protesters on the frontlines, rather to consider all who have actively spoken out against police brutality and injustice as "frontliners" as well. They urged Hongkongers to stand united and to pressure the government into respond to the core demands, with the hopes that the government would finally effectively resolve the ongoing protests and appease the people.
The speakers reiterated that they were simply providing a platform where people could make their voices heard. They are not affiliated with any political party, organization and do not represent LIHKG netizens either. For this reason, they are unable to comment on individual incidents (e.g. setting fires) or any future strategies used in protests. Furthermore, they explained that the movement is spontaneous and self-driven, it is impossible for an individual or group to have the power to command the crowd. They will not and cannot tell anyone to escalate the tactics used in the movement.
Regarding the 5 demands, they emphasized that timing and order were irrelevant since all 5 demands are equally important for the movement. The general will throughout the past protests and assemblies is for all 5 to be met and that would be the only way to appease the people. While some believed that establishing an independent commission of inquiry (ICOI) could be a good first step, there are also some who question such commission's political and judiciary independence and whether it would deliver substantive results.
The speakers expressed uncertainty regarding potential PLA intervention in the future, but were confident that in the case of intervention, Hong Kong and the global economy will be forced to respond accordingly. While they continued to urge Hongkongers to "be water" in the face of potential threat and adversity, they claimed that the only way to solve the current political crisis for the government to respond to the people's demands.
On the various protests on 5 August, the speakers apologised for the inconvenience caused by the non-cooperative movement and the 7 district public assemblies. However, they said that the government’s inability to listen to the peoples’ demands was the leading cause of recent escalation. Although the protests orginated from the anti-extradition movement, recent protests have revealed the depth of the people's discontent which extends to various other socio-political issues -- which the government has made no efforts to address or solve. After numerous peaceful methods of expressing our dissatisfaction were to no avail (e.g. protests, strikes, actions by frontliners), the civil press conference was the most recent attempt to provide a nuanced perspective of recent events.
In terms of future PCs, the speakers said it would depend on the manpower available and the reactions to today’s PC. They hoped for the PCs to focus on the HKPF's excessive use of force and negligence while they also wished to invite other citizens to join them in the future. However, no concrete plans have been made for similar events in the future.