推動灣區深度融合 維護一國兩制分際

<轉載自2018年3月9日 明報 社評>

粵港澳大灣區規劃密鑼緊鼓，三地官員和各界對如何打通人流、物流和資金流，意見紛紜莫衷一是，廣東省政協主席王榮認為，有必要在國家層面建立「協調機制」，處理落實過程中可能遇到的問題。粵港澳大灣區建設是國策，對香港長遠發展也有利，然而要一邊實現大灣區融合，一邊維持一國兩制的分際，並不容易，如何克服箇中矛盾，對中央和香港來說都是一大考驗。

人員流動障礙減 對港影響需思量

過去10多年，港人討論香港與內地融合，往往集中於更緊密經貿關係安排（CEPA） 一類經濟合作，又或內地自由行利弊等問題，然而粵港澳大灣區融合的深度、闊度和複雜度，均不可同日而語。中央推動大灣區融合，關心的並非眼前經濟增長，而是要推動整個地區經濟轉型升級，國家主席習近平參與人大廣東代表團會議時便表示，廣東需要有「壯士斷腕」勇氣，果斷淘汰高污染、高排放的產業，為新興產業發展騰出空間。對港人來說，大灣區深度融合，有可能意味經濟和生活模式顯著轉變，如果以為大灣區建設不過是加強基建互聯互通，進一步方便香港與內地的人員資金往來，僅屬量變而非質變，恐怕低估了這項國策對香港的深遠影響。

近月本港不少人就大灣區融合提出建議，主旨都是希望將人員、資金、貨物以至信息流動的障礙盡量減少，當中很多都與基本民生相關，例如有人主張簡化港人在內地開設銀行戶口手續，有人提議讓港人在廣東省一些「港辦」醫院診所，使用香港醫療券。這些建議不少都有先例可援，僅是現有安排的「擴充版」，只需克服一些技術問題，執行難度有限，然而若要全面落實兩地社福保障可以「跨境轉移」，問題便較為複雜，需要調整政策 。

香港與內地社福保障制度差異甚大，港人在廣東省升學就業，既無法將本港福利「攜上」內地，也未必獲得內地社會保障制度覆蓋。為了解決相關問題，內地正調整政策，繼港澳人士內地就業可享住房公積金待遇，據報當局又在研究讓港澳人士參加內地社保。廣東省政協主席王榮更建議，適度放寬港澳青年在內地購房限制，簡化就業審批規定。這些措施一旦落實，將令妨礙兩地人員流動的因素大減，屆時本港會出現什麼樣的變化，政府需要及早思量。

本港土地供應不足，醫療安老服務未能滿足市民需要，有人建議參考澳門租借珠海橫琴模式，由鄰近廣東省城市批出土地，興建「香港村」，供港人在內地居住；亦有人主張在大灣區加緊開辦港資醫院和安老中心，讓內地生活港人享用高水平醫療安老服務。不少人希望利用大灣區機遇，解決本港醫療住屋等問題，然而天下沒有免費午餐，家家有求，收得甜頭必然要付出。例如有粵方官員便提到，建設「粵港澳衛生與健康共同體」，需要解決一些深層次問題，包括「醫療專業人員就業市場一體化」，說白了就是資格互認。本港醫生可以在內地短期執業，最長3年，然而內地醫生若要來港，門檻便高得多。粵方肯定也想利用融合的機會，向港方提出要求。

中央統籌融合有好處 避免兩制分際變模糊

大灣區建設，粵港澳各有盤算，協調本來便非易事，况且港澳奉行一國兩制，與內地制度差異巨大，融合難度自然更高。王榮指出，由於體制情况，粵港澳大灣區建設，仍然停留在會晤對話和禮節客套局面，溝通對話雖多，務實推動乏力。這番直白說話，道出了當前問題，然而中央肯定不會容許融合工作虛與委蛇、淺嘗輒止。王榮認為應由國家領導人牽頭，設立協調機制，由國家相關部委和粵港澳三地政府參與，統籌大灣區建設規劃及實施過程遇到的問題。有關建議無疑是克服融合困難的方法，然而亦有可能觸動一國兩制分際的問題。

由於大灣區規劃建設，並非香港特區自行管理的事務，《基本法》第22條有關中央政府各部門不得干預特區事務的條文，理論上並不適用，不過中央直接統籌大灣區融合，無可避免會決定本港一些長遠政策和發展規劃，港人可能憂慮一國兩制分際變得模糊。誠然，港方提議的大灣區融合措施，若有中央背書，要促使內地省市首肯將會容易得多，可是反過來如果中央應廣東省要求要港方妥協讓步，特區政府恐怕也不易拒絕。

大灣區融合是雙向過程，不可能是廣東省方面向港方打開大門、港方卻毋須顯著擴闊門戶。要實現大灣區深度融合，又要設法維持一國兩制分際，難度一如既要你中有我，又要保持你我有別。中央和特區政府要魚與熊掌兼得，必須小心掌握分寸，否則很容易引發政治矛盾。由國家領導人設立協調機制，對推動大灣區融合無疑大有幫助，然而中央決策也必須考慮到一國兩制和香港的獨特性，盡量讓港人安心。

Deep Integration of the Greater Bay Area

THE PLANNING of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area is now in full swing. However, government officials and various social sectors in the three regions have diverse opinions on how to smoothen the flow of people, goods and capital, and there is not a consensus yet. Wang Rong, Chairman of Guangdong People's Political Consultative Conference, thinks that a "coordination mechanism" has to be established at the national level to handle problems that may come up in the course of the plan's implementation. The construction of the Greater Bay Area is a national policy and is advantageous to Hong Kong's long-term development. However, it is not easy to bring about the integration of the Greater Bay Area while maintaining the boundaries of "one country, two systems". How to resolve these differences will be a major challenge for the central government as well as for Hong Kong.

Over the past ten-odd years, when discussing the integration of Hong Kong with the mainland, Hong Kong people have usually focused on economic collaboration such as Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA), or problems such as the pros and cons of the mainland's Individual Visit Scheme. However, these issues cannot be compared with the integration of the Greater Bay Area in terms of depth, scale and complexity. The concern of the central government in promoting the integration of the Greater Bay Area is not immediate economic growth but economic transformation and upgrading. For Hong Kong people, the deep integration of the Greater Bay Area may mean significant changes to the economy and their lifestyles. Anyone who thinks that the construction of the Greater Bay Area is only a matter of strengthening the connectivity between infrastructures to facilitate the movement of people and capital between Hong Kong and the mainland and that it will be a quantitative change rather than a qualitative change will be underestimating the profound impact this national policy will have on Hong Kong.

Whether it be Guangdong, Hong Kong or Macao, every region has its own calculations regarding the construction of the Greater Bay Area. It is therefore not easy for the three regions to coordinate their efforts. In addition, both Hong Kong and Macao practise "one country, two systems". Given the huge difference between the systems of Hong Kong and Macao and that of the mainland, integration is inherently far more difficult. Wang Rong thinks that the leaders of the national government should take the lead to establish a coordination mechanism involving related national ministries and the governments of the three regions. The coordination body will coordinate the construction plan of the Greater Bay Area and handle problems that come up in the course of implementing the plan.

The construction of the Greater Bay Area falls outside the purview of the HKSAR. Such being the case, Article 22 of the Basic Law, which states that the central government ministries should not intervene in the affairs of the SAR, does not apply to the initiative in theory. However, if the central government coordinates the integration of the Greater Bay Area directly, it will inevitably have to make decisions on some long-term policies and development plans of Hong Kong. Hong Kong people may worry that the boundaries of "one country, two systems" will become blurred.

The integration of the Greater Bay Area is a two-way process. For Guangdong to open its door to Hong Kong, it is necessary for Hong Kong to widen its door significantly. The difficulty in bringing about the deep integration of the Greater Bay Area while maintaining the boundaries of "one country, two systems" is like "having me in you while maintaining the difference between me and you". If the central government and the SAR government want to have the cake and eat it, they must adopt a cautious and measured approach. Otherwise political conflicts can arise easily. If the leaders of the national government take the lead to establish the coordination mechanism, it will undoubtedly be highly beneficial to achieving the integration of the Greater Bay Area. However, to put Hong Kong people's mind at rest, the central government should also take into account the policy of "one country, two systems" and the uniqueness of Hong Kong when making any decision.

推動灣區深度融合 維護一國兩制分際

粵港澳大灣區規劃密鑼緊鼓，三地官員和各界對如何打通人流、物流和資金流，意見紛紜莫衷一是，廣東省政協主席王榮認為，有必要在國家層面建立「協調機制」，處理落實過程中可能遇到的問題。粵港澳大灣區建設是國策，對香港長遠發展也有利，然而要一邊實現大灣區融合，一邊維持一國兩制的分際，並不容易，如何克服箇中矛盾，對中央和香港來說都是一大考驗。

過去10多年，港人討論香港與內地融合，往往集中於更緊密經貿關係安排（CEPA） 一類經濟合作，又或內地自由行利弊等問題，然而粵港澳大灣區融合的深度、闊度和複雜度，均不可同日而語。中央推動大灣區融合，關心的並非眼前經濟增長，而是要推動整個地區經濟轉型升級。對港人來說，大灣區深度融合，有可能意味經濟和生活模式顯著轉變，如果以為大灣區建設不過是加強基建互聯互通，進一步方便香港與內地的人員資金往來，僅屬量變而非質變，恐怕低估了這項國策對香港的深遠影響。

大灣區建設，粵港澳各有盤算，協調本來便非易事，况且港澳奉行一國兩制，與內地制度差異巨大，融合難度自然更高。王榮認為應由國家領導人牽頭，設立協調機制，由國家相關部委和粵港澳三地政府參與，統籌大灣區建設規劃及實施過程遇到的問題。

由於大灣區規劃建設，並非香港特區自行管理的事務，《基本法》第22條有關中央政府各部門不得干預特區事務的條文，理論上並不適用，不過中央直接統籌大灣區融合，無可避免會決定本港一些長遠政策和發展規劃，港人可能憂慮一國兩制分際變得模糊。

大灣區融合是雙向過程，不可能是廣東省方面向港方打開大門、港方卻毋須顯著擴闊門戶。要實現大灣區深度融合，又要設法維持一國兩制分際，難度一如既要你中有我，又要保持你我有別。中央和特區政府要魚與熊掌兼得，必須小心掌握分寸，否則很容易引發政治矛盾。由國家領導人設立協調機制，對推動大灣區融合無疑大有幫助，然而中央決策也必須考慮到一國兩制和香港的獨特性，盡量讓港人安心。