幫你強化英語


Currently Victor runs an English discussion group on Saturdays. Email him if you are interested to join.

Professor VICTOR FUNG (馮強教授) deanfungenglish.blogspot.com ; deanfungenglish@gmail.com MPhil (Cambridge) Teach academic English writing to associate-degree & high-dip students in Beacon College (遵理英专); Chair professor, Ta Kung Int'l Media Institute; Tel: 34117632 author of :錯在哪裏?常見英語病句>>(7.2013) 读香港时事学英语>>;你一定要懂的字彙570>> 900個詞彙助我成為南華早報首位華人副總編輯>>(7.2014). freelance jobs: (1) write speeches for executives; (2) teach (in workshops) English writing, English editing, PR writing, crisis communication and media management; (3) polish essays for AD, undergraduate and graduate students.


SERVICES: Polish essays/theses for AD, undergrad and graduate students;
ENGLISH WRITING N EDITING, TRAINING,
SPEECH-WRITING FOR EXECUTIVES
3-hour training in Crisis Communication
Contact: deanfungenglish@gmail.com

馮強,中大新聞傳播和英文系一級榮譽畢業(全班考第一),劍橋大學及港大碩士。曾任職《華爾街日報》及加拿大《金融郵報》記者、《南華早報》副總編輯、《讀者文摘》總編輯、香港兩所大學公關處處長,現任香港浸會大學傳理學院國際新聞和財經新聞碩士課程主任。2009年出版《瘋讀社論、強化英語》。2010年在《
最後六任港督的聲音》一書內分析多位前港督發表的講詞。他在2011年5月出版<<生活英語小智慧>>一書。
他目前是3项新闻奖的评判。馮強繼續寫強化英語的書,幫助讀者在學習、職場和人生上更上層樓。(女兒奔奔考IELTS試獲9分滿分。)1. Author: <<瘋讀社論強化英語>> 2. Co-author: << 最後六任港督的聲音>> 3. Author: <<生活英語小智慧>>; 4. Author: <<學會演說、改變你的人生>> 7.2011; Blog: deanfungenglish.blogspot.com/<<巔峰[強化英語]日報>>;twitter.com/deanfung1; facebook.com/victorkfung; www.linkedin.com/pub/victor-fung/33/893/31b;Guitarist of the band "南山浪人"; Motto: "no envy & no fear" (bio: V graduated 1st in his JLM class, became China correspondent 4 the WSJ/Asia,deputy chief editor of the SCMP, chief ed of Reader's Digest and PR director at 2 varsities be4 becom' a teacher in '08.)


VICTOR ALSO DOES SPEECH-WRITING FOR CORPORATE SENIOR EXECUTIVES AND ENGLISH TRAINING































2013年7月24日 星期三

political refugees

Back To Last Page
HK Comment
P09 
China Daily Hong Kong Edition   Fung Keung
2013-07-25


Pro-refugee groups misguided

Many non-governmental organizations’ executives, human-rights lawyers and Church groups leaders in Hong Kong criticized the SAR government on July 22 for not providing satisfactory welfare for the 5,000 “political refugees” trapped in the city.
Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, a Labour Party lawmaker, plans to table a motion in the Legislative Council (LegCo) soon, urging the government to thoroughly review the welfare system for asylum seekers. According to press reports, Cheung told the 100 or so asylum seekers who gathered outside the venue where a government welfare panel met on July 22: “We are obligated to provide the basic needs of those who face persecution and come to Hong Kong as a transition. Your situation is totally unacceptable.”
Sad to say, those people who sympathize with “political refugees”, including Cheung, are misguided and ill-advised. Some of them might even have their own hidden agendas.
Hong Kong people are unquestionably sure that most of the 5,000 asylum seekers are economic refugees, fleeing poverty in their home countries in Africa and South Asia. If they were seeking political asylum, they would have gone to the mainland, which is party to the United Nations Refugee Convention (Hong Kong is not). The central government has the obligation to find willing “host countries” (such as Canada and Australia) to resettle political refugees should they decide not to stay on the mainland.
Why did the refugees choose Hong Kong and not the mainland? They have a higher living standard in this city than on the mainland. Many of them know darn well that they don’t have a genuine political persecution case to present to the investigators if they go to the mainland.
If we improve the welfare of these 5,000 asylum seekers, Hong Kong will become a magnet for those who live in dire poverty in Africa and South Asia. This tiny city would become inundated as thousands head our way. Many Hong Kong people left for the United States in the 1960s and 1970s for the same reason (they were not persecuted by any government) — seeking a better life.
The 5,000 asylum seekers in Hong Kong each receive HK$1,200 per month in housing allowance, HK$1,000 for groceries and a small travel allowance. The allowances, not lavish by Hong Kong or international standards, meet the basic needs of the refugees. Any improvement in the payouts would undoubtedly provide an incentive for poverty-stricken Africans and South Asians. Many of them in fact are living on the mainland now, waiting for an opportunity to cross the Shenzhen River to come to Hong Kong.
This imaginary scenario would bring home my point. Assuming that many Hong Kong people earn HK$8,000 a month, if a certain Western country says it would offer a monthly allowance of HK$15,000 to anyone who resettles in it (no questions asked), wouldn’t this group of local people be tempted to emigrate?
NGO officials, human-rights lawyers, religious leaders and political refugees spoke up for the asylum seekers in front of the LegCo panel on welfare services on July 22. Their arguments surprised few people as they focused on the interests of the refugees and not those of Hong Kong people. Their views invariably were narrow and restricted.
We should take a broad, open and sustained view to the “political refugee” issue. Hong Kong is too small to become a haven for economic refugees who take advantage of Hong Kong people’s sympathy.
Hong Kong people aren’t compassionless and cold-hearted. But we need to balance the interests of citizens who work hard to create wealth and those refugees who aspire for a better life in Hong Kong.
We don’t owe the economic refugees anything.
The author is coordinator of the B.S.Sc in financial journalism program at Hong Kong Baptist University.
We should take a broad, open and sustained view to the “political refugee” issue. Hong Kong is too small to become a haven for economic refugees who take advantage of Hong Kong people’s sympathy.”


沒有留言:

張貼留言