2007年12月18日 星期二

旅發局的羅生門

旅發局賬目混亂,前總幹事臧明華和副總幹事李陳嘉恩難辭其咎。筆者一邊以看連續劇的心態聽立法會聆訊臧買豪華醫療保險未經政府批准,卻感到那像文革批鬥大會,不是為了找出真相,而是無辜的人被枉,不免令人懷疑香港已沒有公義、公平和公正。

本來臧明華買十八萬元保險,小市民不免問「使唔使咁豪」?立法會幾日聆訊後,筆者也覺得臧和李太非常可憐──臧明華要求豪華保險計劃或者太貪心,但從供詞看,她「自把自為」未經許可豪買保險的機會極微;李太更只是執行者,當兩位上司都說冇問題,她按指示執行還被周梁指控「誤導」,極為「無辜」。

從兩個版本看出端倪

筆者認為事件關鍵在於周有否承諾讓臧的保險計劃升級──即使是口頭承諾也是承諾。臧明華指她與周梁淑怡及旅發局當時的財務及編制委員會主席高鑑泉傾談續約的一次會議,獲周口頭同意可尋找她認為適合的保險計劃,有了具體計劃再審批,於是她即時告知李太並要求她尋找計劃。臧明華表示多次叮囑李太計劃要獲主席批准,尤其保費要告知周,與李太的說法一致。李太指從臧處得知她獲准,於是指示下屬找保險計劃及與臧商討內容,至八月底有具體資料後,九月二日電郵周,指根據臧續約條款,她和家人可享用行政級醫療計劃,並列出保費要求周批准。周三天後回覆可以繼續,於是她執行。

周的版本則是,她與臧的續約「談判」很多回合,但不記得有應承過臧,而李太給她的電郵,說臧有權享有行政人員保險計劃。她指既然有權,當然要批,所以就批出保險。回應臧的說法時,她指簽了合約後,先前的承諾便不算,不知能否視為間接承認可能承諾過臧。

如果周臧之間無談過升級保險,李太九月要求批保險給臧時,周為何沒有問:「她沒有保險嗎?為甚麼要再買?」。如果臧曾經要求保險升級遭周拒絕,周應該更為警覺,一提及保險便知道有問題。第二,周曾透露李太電郵內所寫的保額是八十四元,不是八萬四千元,反駁沒有留意保額大的指控。筆者則認為,即使周真的口頭承諾過,看見保額不合理,也應該問一問,何況周一向指沒有應承過!可是從聆訊的口供聽來,周太沒有問過便批准了。

假設臧明華自把自為又怎樣?臧會面臨兩個危險:一、負責人力資源的李太任何時候與周太一對口供便知道。但臧卻吩咐李太要求周批准,顯然不擔心露馬腳;二、刑事檢控。筆者不是法律專業,但偽造文件,或騙公帑這些必是刑事罪行,牢獄之災難免。況且,如果臧講大話,她不敢要求高鑑泉出席聆訊,反而周沒有回應這點,這或多或少證明,臧至少真誠相信她已獲准。

議員與周梁眾口一辭

若臧講了真話,或者真誠相信周容許其升級保險,一切便順理成章:臧獲口頭答應但未獲具體批准,於是由同事找保險計劃,再經李太交主席批准。最後主席獲具體資料(即保費)後批准,當初的口頭承諾得主席確認而實現。那麼,周便是事後反口了。既然電台
DJ騙萬多元稿費也被控,如果周沒有承諾過便應報警求助,要求刑事調查事件,並考慮民事訴訟臧誹謗。

不過議員們看似不贊成筆者的觀點。鄭大班、林健鋒、黃宜弘、石禮謙眾口一辭指摘李陳嘉恩、又只談合約不理可能有口頭合約的疑點,與周的說法一致,只有鄭家富例外。筆者隱然感到眾人立場一致,而且言辭激烈──筆者從未見過他們為促進市民的民生如此落力,實在令人感慨。

15 則留言:

normal citizen 提到...

i watched the tv recording yesterday and i don't agree with your point of view. i am getting the impression that mrs.lee was doing her best to please her boss and from her naive respond to mr cheng she does not appear to be a such high calibre executive that deserve multi million dollars package. and gosh they are tax payers' money.
lastly, i do think they all knew what's going on but they are just too friendly with each other that they kept their eye close and never expect it will be audited and open for investigation. there might be some justice after all

藍天蔚 提到...

Normal citizen,

my point of view is that:

Firstly, whether the high ranking staff wasted money or not, it is an isolated issue. I agree they wasted a lot of money. But this is different from the question whether the Chairman approved her to buy the medical plan.

I agree that Clara Chong was too greedy in asking that medical plan. However, after listening to the hearing, I believed that Selina Chow has approved Clara Chong to buy the medical plan. Moreover, Selina Chow had actually approved, via email, the purchase of the medical plan.

I agree with your point that they were too friendly each others so they turned a blind eye on these. So that all of them should be responsible to their actions. However, the existing situation is that Selina Chow, with strong political power somehow secured help to make herself out of troubles and the other two would be responsible.

If you think that all of them were involved, you would agree that all of them should be responsible, right? I just wanted to voice out that someone may be able to escape and it is unfair and not justice, right?

And what you saw in TV might be biased and distorted! ie. you're based on distorted information.

Lam Tin Wai

譚劍 提到...

閣下可曾在 TA 或 TB 工作過?

藍天蔚 提到...

譚劍:

我沒有在旅發局做過,也沒有在旅協做過,也不認識朋友在那裡做。除了間中去旅行,連旅遊業也沾不上邊。

旅發局咁浪費,我覺得應該拆局、廢局。我也覺得臧明華抵死!臧明華要求一個超級保障,一方面是離譜,但另一方面是人之常情。離譜的原因不用講,人之常情那一邊,則是:「如果我老細要靠我,而家無我唔得,咁我梗係開天殺價,落地還錢!咁你唔還錢係你既事!」 right?

我的主觀判斷是周梁有應承比佢upgrade個plan,而這樣做一定犯法,一定大鑊。臧明華和李陳嘉恩無論如何都係一身蟻,但始作俑者(我覺得)的周梁淑怡不受制裁及懲罰,社會便沒有公義。

可是,現在立法會議員的質問是一面倒,只質問兩個職員不質問周梁淑怡,那豈不是放生她?但為什麼會發生這樣的事呢?我真的不知道了,我只覺得不合常理和不合邏輯。

藍天蔚

Godwin 提到...

I watched "Now" yesterday and totally agreed with your point of view especailly the last sentence. But, in addition to the guys you have quoted, I think that you have missed Ms. Tam, who continued to attact the former CEO, in order to get all attention away from attacking Ms. Chow. Obviously, the former CEO is not a very able to argue especially when she has not been given a reasonable chance to explain the matter in great details. Nonetheless, I think that her talent might not be in this area, and may be she is not totally qualified to be so highly remunerated.

賭徒 提到...

根本三個人都有問題

八萬四千元是遠超市場的市價,三個人看見這個價錢時都唔叫停,還繼續落去,點講都講唔通。

難度員工要求一架飛機代步,三個人事旦一個看見這個要求都覺得合理唔出聲嗎?

今次事件只是表面,根本問題係香港應該快快 close 左依 d 半官半私的怪物,根本是浪費市民的公帑

藍天蔚 提到...

Godwin,

Thanks. (but don't understand what you meant when you mentioned "last sentence")

I neglected Tam since I thought she's always below standard. Commenting her is wasting time and effort. However, for those I mentioned, it's quite clear that they all sided. I also missed Mr. Lau Kong Wah since I was unable to find out his position. He might not have one. I am still not sure.

Whether Clara Chong worths this level of salary? Well, when someone is willing to pay her, she worths it. It's just the same in the market. For so many ppl you see and meet in the market, you may wonder why he worths this level of salary. When it happens, it worths it. So I didn't comment on that! I believe in the market.

While, you're right that she's not pay for attending this trials! Her talents lies in spending money. That's all.

Lam Tin Wai

藍天蔚 提到...

賭徒:

又唔駛咁激!旅發局應該要殺局,但海洋公園都是政府的,只要有清楚的權責界定,不一定完全無用!海洋公園的職責很簡單,就是多些人入場,同埋唔駛資助,咁咪尤得佢囉!

你說得對,見到八萬四,無理由就咁算。Clara Chong就梗係有問題啦,但李陳嘉恩唔出聲,明顯係有問題,好多親政府議員已經講了,我只是講無人講的問題:周梁最有問題,因為佢有權唔批但佢批了,而且而家話唔知、被誤導。咁仲成世界?無法無天啦!

藍天蔚

normal citizen 提到...

yes, i do agree all 3 of them should be responsible on this matter right from the beginning. i also believe what appears in the tv allow me to understand the big picture on how they operate. i don't think i was biased from those shape questions, in fact they were great to demonstrate the truth on how those senior management works and thinks. e.g. mrs. lee thinks working at 11:30pm means heavy workload; approving a multi-million contract w/o paying the full attention on the details; writing an important email to your chairman might have forgetting some points. i doubt that mrs.lee and clara deserve our pitiless, don't you agree....

藍天蔚 提到...

normal citizen,

No, they don't deserve that. But they're certainly in big troubles now. I think the govt and the HKTB should sue them for all these problems.

While Mrs. Chow might escape and walk free from the mess she took part in at the moment if the PAC is biased. This is my prime concern.

Lam Tin Wai

藍天蔚 提到...

normal citizen,

But working at 11:30pm is hard work, if she started the day at 9am. I can't do it anymore although I am much younger than Mr.s Lee.

Of course, she might waste a lot of time in doing meaningless duties or chit-chatting. But for job duties concerning using the brain a lot, 8 hours is already very long.

Lam Tin Wai

normal citizen 提到...

actually, i don't think selina can escape easily since there are other people will testify she knew and agreed in certain degree. no matter how it turns out after the hearing, she is already lost a lot of creditability on her self image. i think she might not be getting a seat in the next legco or maintain the same profile in her own party.

藍天蔚 提到...

normal citizen:

well, before Stanley Ko told the public that he thought Selina Chow had agreed that (--> when I wrote the article), those Legco members were focusing on attacking the two staff but neglected (deliberately) Selina Chow!

While, your expectation that Selina Chow will be unable to secure her seat but I am not sure! I dont know!

Lam Tin Wai

Konkreeeet 提到...

I agree very much with you. I just want to add that when they aim at Ms. Lee they know that she was the weakest among the three and had the least experience in the political circle. She is relatively defensely against them. So she became the perfect scapegoat. She also became the perfect targert for all the senators to show (or maybe "act" would be the more appropriate word) like they wanted justice. This is very sad because there will be no justice when these senators had motives of their own benefits that they try to build on someone's reputation.

藍天蔚 提到...

Konkreeeet:

But after all, having these hearing is good or otherwise we have no chance to know any of these. Mrs Lee will not be in difficult situation since it's quit clear that she's just a weak executive. The question is on whether Mrs Chow or Ms Chong has a heavier responsibility needs to be found out.

Lam Tin Wai