關注社會:香港15年來的"變"與"不變"

Since 1997, when Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty, there is one question I must have answered hundreds of times: "Has anything changed?" Of course it has, I'm tempted to say. Nowhere stays the same. But I have usually resorted to a simple: "No". After all, Hong Kong's core virtues all remain in place – its open economy, free press and personal liberties. The rule of law remains entrenched and every year on June 4, tens of thousands of people go to Victoria Park to remember those killed in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

自1997年香港迴歸中國以來，有一個問題我肯定已經回答過幾百次了，那就是："香港有什麼變化嗎？"我的第一反應總是：當然有。一切都不一樣了。但我最後通常會簡單地回答："沒有。"畢竟，香港的核心優勢全都還在——開放的經濟、言論自由和個人自由。法治的地位依然穩固；每年6月4日，數萬民衆仍會聚集到維多利亞公園(Victoria Park)，紀念1989年天安門廣場事件中的死難者。

But as the city settles into life under its third post-handover chief executive – Leung Chun-ying, who was sworn into office yesterday – that standard answer has become too glib. Over the past decade and a half, subtle but profound shifts have taken place that have left the executive-driven political system bequeathed by Britain looking more and more anachronistic.

但隨着香港特區第三位特首樑振英(Leung Chun-ying)的上任（他於7月1日宣誓就職），我的這個"標準"回答開始顯得過於輕率了。過去15年間，香港發生了一些微小但深刻的變化，在這些變化面前，港英時期遺留下來的、由行政長官驅動的政治體制開始顯得越來越不合時宜。

Three changes stand out. First, the population is better educated: in 1997, less than a quarter of people aged 18 to 32 had tertiary education; now the figure is about half. Second, the population is ageing, with the median age rising from 36 to 41. Third, rather less positively, the wealth gap has widened. A recent government study found that Hong Kong's Gini coefficient, a measure of income distribution, has made it far more unequal than even the US or the UK. In short, Hong Kong is a little smarter, a little older and a lot less equal than it was.

香港比較明顯的變化有三個。第一，民衆受教育程度有所提高。1997年，18歲至32歲的人羣中，只有不到四分之一的人接受過高等教育，如今這個比例約爲二分之一。其次，人口老齡化加劇，中位數年齡已從36歲提高到41歲。第三，財富差距擴大，這是非常不利的一個變化。政府最近所做的一項研究發現，香港的基尼係數（Gini coefficient，一種衡量收入差距的指標）甚至已遠遠高於美國和英國。簡言之，與以往相比，香港變得"聰明"了一些，"老"了一些，社會公平度也大大下降了。

And slowly these three factors have been reworking the city's ethos. Its golden era – the years of fantastic expansion from the 1960s to the 1990s – was a period when anything seemed possible. Refugees from Communism could make fortunes. Even if they didn't, they could expect their salaries to rise and their children to be well-educated.

這三個變化正在漸漸重塑這座城市的性格。在上世紀60至90年代那段瘋狂擴張的時期，也就是在香港的黃金年代，似乎凡事皆有可能。從大陸來的難民可以在香港發財致富。即便發不了財，他們也有希望看到自己能掙到更多的錢，他們的子女能受到良好的教育。

Now, however, aspirations for the future are more constrained. On paper, the city is a lot richer than 15 years ago. Despite the Asian and global financial crises, its gross domestic product is up more than 50 per cent in real terms since 1997. But little of that wealth has trickled down. Those at the top have continued to prosper as Hong Kong continues to serve as China's principal international financial gateway. But salaries for the lowest third of the population have barely risen. Those in the middle are a little better-off but soaring property prices have left the aspiration of home ownership beyond many.

然而如今，人們對未來的理想變得更加謹慎。從賬目上看，香港比15年前富裕得多。儘管亞洲和全球都出現了金融危機，但香港的實際本地生產總值(GDP)自1997年以來增長了50%以上。可新增財富卻很少流向了普通民衆。香港繼續扮演着中國主要國際金融門戶的角色，頂層的富人也隨之繼續過着養尊處優的生活。但對工資最低的三分之一香港民衆而言，薪水幾乎沒漲。中產階層的收入情況略有改善，但面對房價的飆升，他們中的許多人也只能望房興嘆。

Public discontent cannot be ignored in Hong Kong. Its first post-handover chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, was forced to step down after a series of missteps, most famously his handling of anti-subversion legislation that prompted 500,000 people to go on to the streets in protest. Its second, Donald Tsang, limped through his last months in office after allegations that he had received favours from local tycoons, including flights on their private jets.

在香港，民衆的不滿已變得不容忽視。香港迴歸後的第一任特首董建華(Tung Chee-hwa)，因一系列事件處理不當被迫下臺，其中最廣爲人知的是，他對反顛覆法問題的處理曾致使50萬香港民衆上街抗議。第二位特首曾蔭權(Donald Tsang)在任期最後的幾個月裏，日子也過得不安穩，他被指從香港富豪那裏收受好處，包括曾經搭乘他們的私人飛機。

This history should have the new chief executive already feeling nervous. His best approach would be to embrace change and not retreat into the comfort of existing practices. He needs to make Hong Kong's political system more flexible – able to force changes on entrenched privilege – and less susceptible to claims that only preserving current practices will allow continued economic growth. In short, Hong Kong needs a little less harmony and rather more change. This does not threaten its economic wellbeing – rather the opposite. By putting in place forces that could shake up its tycoon-dominated economy, it could open the way for a new generation of entrepreneurs. Only a move to real democracy and a directly elected chief executive offers the prospect of delivering such change.

有這樣的前車之鑑，新任特首現在應該已經感受到了壓力。他最好的辦法就是主動迎接變化，而不是躲進避風港、維持現行做法。他必須讓香港的政治體制變得更有彈性，即能夠迫使已經確立的特權階層做出改變，同時讓香港的政治體制少受這樣一種論調的影響——只有維持現行做法，經濟才能繼續增長。簡言之，香港需要少一些和諧，多一些變化。這不會對香港經濟的健康構成威脅。相反，這會促進香港經濟健康發展。通過推出一些舉措、撼動大亨主導經濟的局面，香港能夠爲新一代企業家的成長開闢道路。只有推行真正的民主、推動特首直選，纔有可能促成這種變化。

This is a message Mr Leung might share with Beijing, pointing out that what holds for Hong Kong also holds for China. As the mainland becomes more complex, socially and economically, it too is finding that economic freedom combined with a lack of direct accountability is hard to sustain. Vested interests will struggle to hold on to the wealth and power they have acquired. If the trickle-down stops – as it probably will – popular anger will build.

樑振英或許可以把這一觀點和北京方面一起分享，他可以讓北京方面知道：對香港有好處的事情，對中國也有好處。隨着中國內地的社會、經濟情況變得越來越複雜，中國政府也發現，缺乏直接問責制的經濟自由將很難持續。既得利益階層會極力維護他們已經獲得的財富和權力。如果依然是國富民窮（目前看來這是有可能的），民怨將不斷集聚。

As Hong Kong has shown, you don't need democracy to force a change of leadership.

香港的經歷表明，不一定非得有民主，才能迫使領導層改變。