我們的未來會是何種模樣？
將來，香港公務員隊伍及主要官員都會獲得市民信賴。
我們都可以獨立地制訂財政預算。
香港的立法和司法機構可以獨立運作，不受任何干預。
我們享有新聞自由，記者可以報道任何題目，即使是具有爭議性的。
和平地表達政見不會令我們被迫害或被囚禁。
民主派人士不會被擯諸立法會外，我們可以公平公開的選舉選出立法會議員。
這些標準寫於1996年，時任港督彭定康提出的16項衡量香港未來是否成功的指標，由《蘋果日報》整理及刊載。
在這星期內，《蘋果日報》創辦人黎智英被捕，不獲保釋；民主派立法會前議員許智峯開始了在歐洲的流亡；黃之鋒、周庭及林朗彥因上年《反修例運動》中的角色被判監。
現在是2020年。
作為一位80後的香港人，我們生於斯長於斯，希望將我們的家變成一個更美好的地方。由我五年前第一次參與區議會選舉至今，目睹政府對待兩派區議會如何極端的不同。香港正在衰落，並非因為市民政治覺醒，而在於政府的腐敗。
2019年11月，正值《反修例運動》期間的區議會選舉，被視為運動的一部份。相信民主的香港人填滿了所有區議會選區，讓香港人第一次，每人都有機會投票。這些參選人力抗建一直支持林鄭政府實施《逃犯條例》的建制派，最終，我們勝出了那一役，投票率高達71%，民主派陣營取得17個區議會的主導權。更重要的是，透過投票，我們的議會充分地獲得民意授權，可惜這平台，隨後卻成為了政府打擊的對象。
在香港政府的高壓管治與武肺疫情肆虐下，2020年是如此艱難的一年。這一年對所有區議員，特別是首次當選的區議員而言，可謂荊棘滿途。雖然民主派在17個區議會均佔多數，但政府拒絕合作甚至挑釁的態度，令區議會成為一個極具敵意的戰場。
在區議會會議中，以民政事務總署為首的公務員團隊不再尊重自己的專業與責任，如今已是相當常見的現象。他們往往毫無職業操守，不遵從指引與規程，當面對民主派議員質疑時，更反惡人先告狀，責罵議員，以圖掩飾自己的失職。在今年初的灣仔區議會中，民政處竟對派贈居民的口罩包裝上的文字作出政治審查。因為建制派區議員的一封投訴信，民政處扣起了本應發還予購買口罩的非政府組織的70萬公帑，長達二百多天。事實上，民政處把該封投訴信凌駕於區議會會議的撥款決議之上，絕不合乎規程。這宗失職事件亦引起了申訴專員公署的調查。而這並非孤例，大家可以在不同區議會的糾紛中，發現相似情況。
而我必須指出的是︰在過去，當建制派主導區議會時，類似情況從未發生，民政專員亦從未在會議途中，貿然離席。而單計今年，17個區議會中，民政專員離席杯葛的情況已出現89次。其實這班民政專員，正是特首林鄭月娥在區議會中的代表，這傲慢的政府，認為自己毋須聽取民意——指責區議員提出社區檢測中心等敏感議題，失職離場，亦不見怪。有如此的政府，難怪我們至今仍深受疫情困擾。民政專員不負責任的態度，正是今天林鄭月娥的特區政府無能的寫照。
因此 2020年每次區議會會議，氣氛都極之緊張，較諸去屆區議會只有我一名民主派孤身作戰時，形勢甚至更惡劣和複雜。政府與建制派明目張膽勾結之餘，我們同時還要面對民主派的內部分歧。或者有人不太珍惜區議會的平台，覺得並不重要，但我們念茲在茲、必須守護的，其實是對社會公義的信念。
因此今年的區議會工作，過程極端困難，甚至不人道，你也可以笑我天真。但這是意志之戰︰我深信不可放棄。如果讓政府半步，他們只會得寸進尺，而我們的運動，早已無險可守，退無可退。
堅持或者痛苦，也可能令我們置身險境。然而，運動從未停下。無論是誰，身處哪個崗位，我們仍須撫心自問︰「我們想要一個怎樣的香港未來？」
寫於2020.12.3
為電台節目《香港家書》中文版
The future of Hong Kong
What would our future look like?
In the future, our civil servants and principal officials would be trusted by the people.
We would formulate our financial budget independently.
The LegCo and Judiciary of Hong Kong could operate independently, without any intervention.
We would have freedom of the press, allowing reporters to write about any topics, regardless of controversy.
Expressing our political views peacefully would not lead to any persecution or prison time.
The democrats wouldn’t be locked out of the LegCo’s doors. We could have fair and open elections to elect our representatives.
This was written in 1996, in an Apple Daily piece listing 16 indicators of Hong Kong’s success in the future.
This week, their founder Jimmy Lai is arrested without bail. Former pro-democrat lawmaker Ted Hui has begun his exile in Europe. Activist Joshua Wong and two others are sentenced to prison for their roles in last year’s protest. This is 2020.
As part of the Generation Y, Hong Kongers like me grew up trying the best to make our hometown a better place. It has been five years since I first ran in the district council election. I have witnessed how the government treats the district council drastically different when the majority went from one camp to the other. Hong Kong is declining, not because of our citizens’ political awakening, but because of our government’s decay.
In November 2019, in the midst of the anti-extradition law amendment bill movement, it was the first time every Hong Kong voter has a chance to vote in the district council election because there was no more uncontested election. As we saw the election as part of the movement, every democratic candidate were fighting against the pro-government camp, which supported Carrie Lam’s implementation of the extradition law to China. We had great success in that war. With voter turnout at 71%, we took control of the council in 17 districts. We gained the legitimacy in a council that represents the people, yet it became the target of the government later.
With government suppression and COVID-19 looming over us, 2020 has been a tough year. This year has been hugely challenging for all the district councillors, especially the new ones. Despite having more members than the pro-government camp in the district council, the government’s uncooperative—at times aggressive—attitude towards the democratic councillors made the district council a hostile battleground.
In the DC meetings, civil servant showing no respect to their profession is now a common sight. They often show little regard to professional ethics—shouting at councilors in attempt to cover up their actions that did not follow guidelines and regulation. Early this year in Wan Chai DC, they even censored the text on the package leaflet of the facemasks for residents. For this sole reason, they held over $700,000 that was due to the NGO that helped the DC with the facemask purchase for more than 200 days, just because of a letter from pro-government district council members. And the HAD allowed such a letter to override the conclusion of our district council meeting. This is not complying with any procedure. That has led to an investigation by the office of the ombudsman. This is not the only example, you can find many in our district councils. And I have to tell everyone that, in the previous district council dominated by the pro-government camp, incidents of this sort have never happened. District officers have never walked out of DC meetings before. But this year, the district officers have walked out 89 times in 17 districts. The district officers are the representative of Carrie Lam in the DCs. You won’t be surprised because they chose to walk out just so they don’t have to listen to what their people say, and blaming councillors for raising sensitive topics such as “community test centers”. No wonder why we are still suffering from the pandemic. This is all Carrie Lam government’s doing.
Every meeting in 2020 was very intense, even worse than when I was the only pro-democrat.
Not only has the government joined hands with the pro-government camp, we now have to deal with democratic councillors’ differences. Some may not value the platform of the DC as much as others do. But what we have to guard, is the belief in justice.
It’s inhumane, it’s extremely difficult, and you can call me foolish. But this is a test of will—not allowing myself to give up is what I have determined to do. If I give them an inch now, they’ll take a mile soon enough. Our movement can’t afford to lose any more ground.
Being persistent maybe painful, or may put us in a dangerous position. Yet, the movement is still going on. Whoever we are in whatever position, we need to ask ourselves, “How do we want to shape the future of Hong Kong?”
(Written in 3rd December, 2020)