T is of course better for the Chief Executive(CE) to gauge public sentiment by going toplaces to listen to w hat people have to say thanto divorce himself from reality. However, things willnot turn out as he wishes if political groups try toanticipate each other in getting tickets to suchforums or if at them "people of his own" try to put on ashow of support. It was the case with both the forum that took placelast Sunday and that on the Sunday before last thatlarge numbers of people queued up for tickets well inadvance. Yesterday, many in the queue wore asurgical mask as if afraid to be recognised. Peoplecannot but wonder. Are they ordinary citizens? Didthey just queue or actually get in? Is it true that theyhad been mobilised by political groups that wantedtheir supporters to get in to voice their politicaldemands or wanted to squeeze their rivals out? Towhat extent did those who managed to speak at theforum represent public sentiment? At such a forum officials do not hear what peoplehave in mind, still less precisely gauge publicsentiment. There are cases of successful consultation the CEwould do well to refer to if he does want to find outwhat is in citizens' minds. Some groups made it cleara long time ago that they were unhappy with theLeung team's performance. Instead of avoidingpeople who oppose him, Leung Chun-ying should gointo the lion's den. He should offer to meet thosegroups and listen to what they have to say ratherthan have the police isolate demonstrators. That isby no means far-fetched. In 2007 Secretary forDevelopment Carrie Lam (as she then was) went toQueen's Pier to talk to demonstrators. We believethe administration can distinctly hear what is truly incitizens' minds so long as it is willing to take itselfdown a peg or two. A more effective way is to ask academicsscientifically to pick a group of people at random andinvite them to a forum. In 2010 Radio TelevisionHong Kong began to work together with the PublicOpinion Programme at the University of Hong Kongto pick a hundred Hong Kong citizens at random andinvite them to a debate. The scheme is based on"Deliberative Polling", which Stanford Universityoriginated. Sample members listen to guestspeakers' arguments and put questions to them atsuch a debate, and the organisers analyse how theirideas change because of it. "Deliberative Polling" is quite effective. Whydoesn't the government make good use of similarideas? It may be desirable to have regional forums.We believe there are ways in which academics canmake the technical adjustments required in pickingsample members to make it possible to haveregional conferences. For example, a randomsample may be taken in Kowloon East only. In short, there are citizens who support Mr Leungas well as those who oppose him and, if he wants tolisten to what truly represents public sentiment, heought to be realistic. He should adopt "DeliberativePolling" ideas. To show himself sincere, he shouldface citizens. Only at such a forum will he have achance of gauging public sentiment. Only with suchinformation can the administration forge consensusamong Hong Kong people and bring about a virtuouscircle. 英語社評聲檔 english.mingpao.com/critic.htm 明報社評 區要落民意要聽梁振英應借鑑「慎思民調」 特首落區聆聽民意揣摩民情，迷你倉新蒲崗當然較閉門造車為佳，但若落區招惹政團鬥早霸位入場表態，又或變成「自己友」撐場做秀，根本事與願違。 從過去兩次諮詢會的安排可見，事前不單有大批民眾鬥早排隊領票，昨日更有不少戴口罩的人排隊，似乎怕被人認出。公眾滿腹疑問，排隊者真的是一般市民嗎？排隊者真的有進場嗎？還是這只是排隊黨所為？甚或是政治團體動員的結果，力求把「自己友」保送進場，表達政治訴求，甚至把敵對陣營的人擠走？最終成功發言的，又有多大程度能反映民意？ 這樣的諮詢會，官員不會聽到真正的民意，更不可能藉此掌握切實的民情。 若特首真的想聆聽市民心聲，過去早有成功先例。社會上早有團體公開表示對梁班子施政不滿，梁振英不但不應迴避反對者，更應「深入虎穴」。 與其勞動警察把示威者隔開，不如直接邀請相關團體代表會面，直接聽取他們的意見及訴求。這做法絕非天方夜譚，2007 年，時任發展局長的林鄭月娥便曾親赴皇后碼頭，與示威者對話。只要政府願意放下身段，相信定能聽到更多清晰、真實的民意。 另一種更有效的做法，是借助學者採取科學的隨機抽樣方法，邀請市民出席諮詢會。2010 年開始，香港電台以美國史丹福大學創立的「慎思民調」的理念為藍本，聯同香港大學民意研究計劃，全港隨機抽樣100 名香港市民出席辯論會，讓市民可以聽取嘉賓的論點，並向嘉賓即場發問。大會同時分析出席市民在辯論前後的意向變化。 「慎思民調」的理念頗為有效，政府為何不善加利用？如果要分區諮詢，相信學者也有方法在抽籤時作出相關的技術調校（例如只限東九龍區市民參加），即可執行。 總言之，市民有挺梁的也有反梁的，梁振英若想聽取具代表性的民意，便必須實事求是，借鑑「慎思民調」，直面市民，顯示誠意，這樣的諮詢，才有機會掌握民意民情，用以建構社會共識，締造良性循環。 2013.08.19 Glossary 2013 . 08 . 20 星期二website: english.mingpao.comemail: english@mingpao.com D7二維碼英語社評聲檔english.mingpao.com/critic.htmIanticipate /an'tIsIpeIt/ somebodydo something before it can be done by somebodyelse far-fetchedvery difficult to believe take somebody down a peg or twolower somebody's high opinion of themselves
文章標籤
全站熱搜
