注意：此題目原是DSE歷屆試題，但為免侵犯版權，題目經過修改，同學可以按試題之年份及題號自行查閱原題目。以下內容乃K.W.Ho之補習教材，於課堂教授，內容乃配合K.W.Ho之答題方法及風格所製作，同時內容可能有錯誤之處以供在課堂上糾正。非補習學生在未有得到課堂教學的情況下錯誤使用，恕不負責，同學請敬請留意。
【Free】6000頁筆記及60份5**考卷免費使用：按此
Youtube教學：按此
_________________________________________________________________________
原題目題號：DSE-2013-Essay-01
「中國因素是塑造1980-2000年間香港政治發展的主要因素。」評論此說能否成立。
背景 經過了一個半世紀英國的殖民地管治，香港於1997回歸中國。 // 立場及架構 在1980-2000年間，中國因素成為了塑造香港政治發展的最主要因素，因中國因素左右了香港代議政制、政黨政治、公務員本地化的發展，其重要性大於英國因素和香港因素。因此，題目所言確能成立。
主旨句 其一，中國因素在1980-2000年間接及直接影響了香港代議政制的發展。 // 主項重要性 在間接影響方面，由於中國與英國於1984年簽訂了《中英聯合聲明》，確定香港將會於1997年回歸中國。為了避免香港回歸到中國後會受到中國的專制管治，英國政府加快香港代議政制的發展，希望將民主植根於香港，例如在1985年分別於立法局進行首次間接選舉及在區議會取消了全部的官守議席，提高立法局及區議會的人民代表性。及後，港督彭定康更於1992年推出政改方案，大幅改革立法局，全部60個議席均改由選舉產生。至於直接影響方面，中國政府對於急進的政改方案十分不滿，指責方案有違《中英聯合聲明》及《基本法》，另籌「臨時立法會」，並於1997年回歸後取締了1995年所選出的立法局議員，導致該批議員被迫「下車」，直接改變了香港政治歷史的發展。 // 小結 可見，中國因素間接及直接影響了香港代議政制的發展，意義非凡。
其二，中國因素塑造了香港政黨政治的發展。由於香港需要於1997年回歸到中國的管治，驅使港英政府推行代議政制改革，放寬選舉權，以加強香港的民主成份，結果吸引了不少人士或組織成立政黨以參與立法局及區議會選舉，例如民主黨、民建聯及工聯會，成為了香港政黨政治萌芽的要因。此外，中國因素間接促使了民主派陣營的政黨於1990年代深受港人支持，因1989年中國高壓鎮壓八九民運的事件令港人對中國的管治深感恐懼，因此更加支持民主派陣營，希望藉民主派人士以爭取提高香港的民主程度，避免回歸後陷入中國的專制管治，結果導致1991年立法局選舉，18名直選議員中就多達14名是來自民主派陣營。再者，中國因素也直接影響了政黨的發展，因民建聯及工聯會等建制派獲得了中國政府的強烈支持，在中國1996年籌組的「臨時立法會」中，建制派便佔了大多數，更成為了首屆回歸後的立法局議員。可見，中國因素左右了香港政黨政治的發展，是塑造香港政治發展的主因。
其三，中國因素推動了香港公務員本地化的發展，對香港政治發展影響重大。由於中國與英國在香港前途問題上已經確立了「港人治港」的原則，令港英政府需要加快公務員本地化的進程，以過渡至日後的港人治港。因此，港英政府不但提高了華人公務員的人數和比例，如聘請更多的華人公務員，使華人公務員人數由1980年的124,950人增加至1990年的188,393人，而比例上亦由1980年的97.61%進一步增加至1990年的98.68%，令更多華人可以參與對香港的管治。更甚，高級官員的轉變尤其明顯，因1980年前未曾有華人擔任司級官員，但至1984年中國與英國簽訂《中英聯合聲明》後，港英政府逐步委任華人出任司級官員之職，例如陳方安生和曾蔭權分別先後於1993年及1995年出任布政司及財政司。至香港於1997年回歸後，華人董建華成為了首任香港特首，至於司級官員也全由華人出任。可見，中國因素推動了香港公務員本地化的進程，起了舉足輕重的作用。
雖然英國因素及香港因素也影響了香港政治的發展，但重要性不及中國因素。
主旨句 英國因素也是塑造香港政治發展的成因之一。 // 他項重要性 於1997年香港回歸前，英國政府對於香港的發展有著全部的決策權，直接影響了香港政治的發展，例如在1980年代前，英國政府無意提高香港的民主成份，故當時未有出現大規模的代議政制改革，但至1980年代，英國政府推動代議政制改革，才使立法局能夠引入選舉，至1992年英國政府更准許港督彭定康革新立法局，把1995年立法局全數60席改由選舉產生，大大提高了立法局的代表性。 // 小結 可見，英國政府對於香港政治發展有著直接的影響力。
主旨句 然而，中國因素較英國因素更加重要。// 駁論 就因果關係而言，中國因素導致了英國政府進行代議政制改革。過往英國並不希望下放權力予華人，因英國政府恐懼會影響到其殖民統治，故未有在立法局引入選舉。然而，至香港即將回歸到中國的管治，英國政府為了提高香港的民主程度，以免香港回歸後受到中國的專制管治，故大力推動代議政制改革，甚至准許彭定康1992年的政改方案，將全部立法局議席改由選舉產生。 // 小結 因此，中國因素是導致英國政府改革香港政治的主因，也是塑造香港政治發展的最重要因素。
香港因素也是左右香港政治發展的成因之一。隨著二次大戰後香港經濟的起飛和教育的普及，中產階級湧現，他們政治意識較強，在滿足經濟利益後進一步要求分享政治權力，成為香港政治的新勢力。加上，由於港人希望落實「港人治港」的方針，故在1980年代起積極組成政黨以晉身立法局及參加區議會選舉，例如成立匯點(1983年)、港同盟(1990年)等，使政黨於1980年後遍地開花。可見，香港本地因素也是影響香港政治發展的重要力量。
然而，中國因素的重要性大於香港因素。就因果關係而言，中國因素才是港人能夠全面參與香港政治的主因。因中國與英國確立了「港人治港」的原則，並且導致英國推行代議政制改革，才使港人活躍起來，成立組黨以參與選舉，故中國因素才是影響香港政治發展的根本因素。再者，就影響力而言，中國因素的影響力遠遠大於香港因素，因中國因素可以直接干預香港政治的發展，例如中國不滿1995年所選出的立法局結果，結果另組「臨時立法會」，並於回歸後取締了1995年該屆的議員，反映中國因素的影響力遠大於本地因素。因此，中國因素才是塑造香港政治發展的主因。
總括而言，雖然英國因素及香港因素也是塑造香港政治發展的成因，但重要性遠遠不及中國因素。至1997年香港回歸後，中國對香港政治更有著全部的決策權，對香港政治發展起了舉足輕重的影響。
‘The China factor was the main factor that shaped the political development of Hong Kong in the period 1980-2000.’ Comment on the validity of this statement.
After one and a half century of British colonial rule, Hong Kong was finally handed over to China in 1997. From 1980 through 2000, the China factor had been the most important factor that shaped Hong Kong’s political development. It influenced the development of representative government, party politics and localization of civil servants in Hong Kong, having greater importance than the Britain factor and Hong Kong factor. Therefore, the statement is valid.
First of all, the China factor directly and indirectly impacted upon the development of a representative government in Hong Kong in the period concerned. With respect to indirect impact, it all started with the Sino-British Joint Declaration中英聯合聲明 of 1984, which stated that the sovereignty of Hong Kong would be returned to China in 1997. In order to prevent Hong Kong from falling prey to Chinese autocratic rule after the handover, the British government sped up the process of establishing a representative government in Hong Kong and pushed hard for a firmly established democracy in this city. For instance, the first indirect election of the Legislative Council was held and all official seats in the District Council abolished in 1985 with the aim of raising the representative of the two councils. After that, Governor Chris Patten implemented his plan for political reform in 1992. He restructured the Legislative Council and changed all 60 seats into elected seats. As for direct impact, the Chinese government was unhappy with the radical political reform and criticized it for violating the Joint Declaration聯合聲明 and Hong Kong Basic Law基本法. The Chinese government set up the Provisional Legislative Council臨時立法會 instead, whose members replaced those elected in 1995 after the handover of 1997. They were forced to ‘get off the train下車’ and the incident directly changed the political development of Hong Kong. Therefore, the China factor was of special significance as it directly and indirectly affected the development of a representative government in Hong Kong.
Secondly, the China factor shaped the development of party politics in Hong Kong. The scheduled handover of Hong Kong motivated the Hong Kong British government to start a reform directed to build a representative government. The requirements for voters were relaxed to introduce more democratic elements to Hong Kong. As a result, many people and organizations were attracted to form political parties so as to stand for elections of the Legislative and District Councils. Examples are the Democratic Party民主黨, DAB民建聯 and HKFTU工聯會. This was a decisive factor that led to the emergence of party politics in Hong Kong. In addition, the China factor indirectly built Hongkongers’ support for pro-democracy parties. The bloody crackdown on the 1989 Democracy Movement八九民運 induced fear of the forthcoming Chinese rule among Hong Kong people. For that reason, they supported the pan-democratic camp more and hoped the democrats would fight for higher degree of democracy in Hong Kong to prevent possible autocratic administration after the handover. As a result, in the Legislative Council Election of 1991 as much as 14 of the 18 elected members were democrats. Furthermore, the China factor directly influenced the development of political parties. Parties in the pro-establishment camp, exemplified by the DAB民建聯 and HKFTU工聯會, were strongly backed by the Chinese government. In the Provision Legislative Council臨時立法會 organized by China in 1996, the majority of legislators were pro-Beijing and all of them became the original members of the Legislative Council after the handover. Therefore, the China factor influenced the development of Hong Kong party politics and played an important in shaping the city’s political development.
Thirdly, the China factor facilitated the localization of civil servants in Hong Kong and had great influence over Hong Kong’s political development. Regarding the prospect of Hong Kong, China and Britain confirmed the principle of ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong港人治港’. The Hong Kong British government found it necessary to accelerate the localization of civil service for a smooth transition to ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong’ in the future. Therefore, the government increased the number and subsequently the proportion of Chinese civil servants. This was manifested through the increase in the number of Chinese civil servants from 124,950 in 1980 to 188,393 in 1990 and in the percentage of them from 97.61% to 98.68% in 1990. As a result, more Chinese people took part in the governance of Hong Kong. As for senior officials, the changes were even more significant. No secretaries were Chinese before 1980; however, after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration中英聯合聲明 in 1984, the Hong Kong British government gradually appointed Chinese officials as secretaries. For instance, Anson Chan陳方安生 and Donald Tsang曾蔭權 took up the posts as Chief Secretary and Financial Secretary in 1993 and 1995 respectively. In the post-colonial period, Tung Chee-hwa董建華, who is native Chinese, became the first Chief Executive of Hong Kong and all secretaries were Chinese. It is quite obvious that the China factor played a decisive role in facilitating the localization of civil services in Hong Kong.
The Britain factor and Hong Kong factor also affected Hong Kong’s political development, but they were less important than the China factor.
The Britain factor was also involved in shaping Hong Kong’s political development. Before the handover of 1997, the British government held absolute decision-making power over Hong Kong and directly influenced its political development. For example, the British had no intention of adding democratic elements into Hong Kong’s political system before the 1980s and there was no extensive reform introducing a representative government. It was not until the 1980s when the British started the reform and launched Legislative Council elections. In 1992, the British government permitted Governor Chris Patten彭定康 to transform the Legislative Council and to change all the 60 seats into elected ones in 1995, boosting the representativeness of the Council. Therefore, the British government had direct influence upon Hong Kong’s political development.
But the China factor was more important than the Britain one. In terms of cause-result relationship, the China factor led to the British government’s attempts at representative government. In the past, the British were reluctant to grant power to the Chinese as they worried that this would work against its colonial administration. There was thus no election for the Legislative Council. However, when the handover of Hong Kong to China was scheduled, the British government pushed forward the reform of Hong Kong’s political system in order to make Hong Kong a more democratic city and prevent it from coming under Chinese autocratic rule. The British even accepted the political reform proposal suggested by Chris Patten in 1992 and changed all seats of the Legislative Council into elected seats. Therefore, the China factor was the determinant of British attempts at political reform and it was the most important factor in shaping the city’s political development.
The Hong Kong factor also affected Hong Kong’s political development. Economic prosperity and further educational development after the Second World War led to the emergence of the middle class They were politically conscious and demanded more political rights after the improvement in living standard. They became a new force in Hong Kong’s politics. Also, Hong Kong people longed for the implementation of ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong港人治港’. They enthusiastically formed political parties starting from the 1980s, including the Meeting Point匯點(1983) and the United Democrats of Hong Kong港同盟(1990), with the aim of entering the Legislative Council and standing for the District Council elections. This led to the proliferation of political parties after 1980. Therefore, the local factor was also an important motivational force for Hong Kong’s political development.
However, the China factor was more important than the Hong Kong one. In terms of causality, the China factor was the main reason for Hongkongers’ full political participation. It was China that established the principle of ‘Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong港人治港’ with Britain and motivated British reform in political system. These fueled the enthusiasm of Hong Kong people who were inspired to form political parties and to stand for elections. The China factor was therefore the fundamental factor that affected Hong Kong’s political development. In addition, in terms of impact, the China factor gave much stronger impact when compared to the Hong Kong factor because China was able to intervene in the political development of Hong Kong directly. For example, China was unhappy with the list of legislators elected in 1995 and it formed another council named the Provisional Legislative Council臨時立法會, whose members replaced those elected in 1995 after the handover. The Chinese influence was in fact much greater than the impact the local factor could make. Therefore, the China factor was the chief factor that shaped Hong Kong’s political development.
In conclusion, although the Britain factor and Hong Kong factor also shaped Hong Kong’s political development, they were far less important than the China factor. After the handover of 1997, China even had absolute power over the decision-making process involved in Hong Kong’s politics, exerting significant effect on the city’s political development.
Comments