湯顯明中聯辦互動頻仍 所為何事廉署須講清楚

<轉載自2013年4月25日 明報 社評>

 

前任廉政專員湯顯明在任期間，有關廉署酬酢和送禮的不當開支，本報記者進一步整理、排查相關資料後，發現超支背後一些情况，例如湯顯明與中聯辦之間的關係，更值得關注。「廉政門」使廉署形象蒙污，人員士氣受打擊，挫傷了公衆對廉署的信任；廉署若要重振旗鼓，必須坦誠交代湯顯明在任期間發生了什麼事，才可以掃除陰影，恢復公衆的信任。昨日，現任廉政專員白韞六表示將以大公無私原則，全面配合立法會議員跟進事件，包括提供議員索取的資料，白韞六這個態度值得肯定，立法會應該把握機會釐清事態，找出真相，協助廉署重建公信力。

湯顯明中聯辦頻密互動 性質內容使人諸多聯想

 

湯顯明任內5年酬酢資料，其中宴請中聯辦官員超過20次，宴請對象主要是中聯辦副主任黃蘭發和警務聯絡部部長謝小青，即每年平均有4次這類活動，若中聯辦禮尚往來，以同樣次數回請湯顯明，則雙方接觸就更多更密。特首是廉政專員的頂頭上司，湯顯明任內見過曾蔭權多少次，廉署應該提供相關資料作比對。另外，從廉署提交給立法會財務委員會披露送禮總值約22萬元的明細文件，其中受禮「中聯辦官員」有14筆，價值由1665元的廉署紀念筆和290元的廉署盾牌都有。

 

湯顯明與中聯辦官員互動，所為何事？廉署工作主要是肅貪倡廉、推動廉潔教育、接待訪客介紹經驗等，中聯辦官員想了解其工作梗概，可以理解；但是，以湯顯明與中聯辦官員互動次數、與宴請對象基本上集中黃蘭發和謝小青兩人，若說見面目的只是為了解和介紹廉署一般工作，不合情理。然則，廉署工作與中聯辦應無交集，湯顯明與中聯辦官員卻互動頻仍，所為何事，若不交代清楚，難免使人有諸多聯想。

 

另外，有關互動，是否只有專員與中聯辦官員在場，抑或還有其他廉署人員與會，廉署也應該交代清楚，讓公衆知道活動是怎樣一種性質和狀况。昨日，有立法會議員對湯顯明頻頻宴請中聯辦官員，除了關注專員有否濫用公帑宴客，最擔心會否泄漏廉署機密。議員這個擔心，也是公衆疑惑之處。廉署一直以「密密實實」運作，增強市民舉報貪污罪案的信心，在處理湯顯明與中聯辦的關係上，若廉署按這個精神辦事，只會作繭自縛，廉署應該坦誠交代這些互動的性質和內容，才有望重建市民的信心和重拾市民的信任。

 

湯顯明任內出現的「廉政門」，是廉署成立39年以來最大的事故，嚴重衝擊廉署的形象和公信力，廉潔核心價值亦蒙上陰影，情况對於廉署而言，不僅是一場危機，廉潔政府、廉潔社會同樣處於前景不明之中，能夠化解這場危機的做法，只有一句話，就是：「誠實是最好的政策」，期望特首梁振英與廉署本諸這個精神，以切實舉措，重建廉署形象，讓市民與國際社會知道廉署仍然在肅貪倡廉。

 

白韞六開誠布公值得肯定應考慮對廉署作體檢

 

昨日，現任廉政專員白韞六約見傳媒，強調已採取措施匡正已披露的酬酢送禮不當做法，同時表明會配合立法會跟進此事，例如會應要求提供相關資料等。白韞六以高透明度應對此事，走對了第一步，有關措施相信可以改變湯顯明治下的局面，總體而言，他的取態和做法值得肯定。不過，白韞六提出的措施，只是小修小補，對已經運作了39年老店而言，這幾招是否就能掃除弊端，使廉署再顯光芒，是一大疑問。

 

單就「廉政門」已知的酬酢和送禮而言，其實，廉署就開支上限，內部有文件白紙黑字規定，若過去歷任專員都不曾發生事故，則為何到湯顯明主政時出現？說明原有規章制度在人治之下，會出現異化和腐化。另外，湯顯明酬酢超支，審計署揭露廉署以「分拆帳單」、「劃入項目宣傳費用開支」等方式，繞過規管，這個情况，若以往沒有出現過，則為何社區關係處會配合湯顯明「消化」超支？這些都是「廉政門」一小角暴露出來的問題。

 

昨日，白韞六回答傳媒提問時，也只能說「未來專員怎麼做，我難以控制，但是起碼留下了我的做法」，這幾句話，確切說明人治的不確定性。我們認為，白韞六堵塞漏洞的做法會收效，若他同時從更宏觀角度審視廉署這家老店，構思一些方案，從優化廉署體質的角度出發，在他向特首報告今次事件時一併提出，就更具積極意義。良好的廉署運作，要靠制度，不能靠人治，白韞六有責任強化廉署制度之治。

特首是廉政專員的直屬上司，歷任港督、特首為了避嫌，鮮有過問廉署的事，不過，當年成立廉署的一些特定做法，39年後是否足以應對日新月異的情况，值得討論。特首梁振英應該想一想，是否要對廉署作一次全身體檢，然後針對性地強化一些環節，例如是否仿效監警會之監督警隊，成立類似組織監督廉署，完善其肅貪倡廉職能，現在是適當作出改變的時候。

Editorial

Timothy Tong and the Liaison Office

DURING its former commissioner Timothy Tong Hin-ming's term of office, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) violated its own guidelines governing entertainment and gift-giving expenses, thus undermining public confidence in the Commission. Yesterday, Tong's successor Simon Peh Yun-lu said he would, with the utmost impartiality, cooperate fully with the Legislative Council in its investigation into the matter. This is the right approach to take.

 

According to the available data, Tong's entertainment activities during his five-year term included hosting more than 20 meals with officials from the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government, and his most regular guests were Huang Lanfa, Deputy Director of the Liaison Office, and Xie Xiaoqing, head of the Office's police liaison section. On average, there were four such meetings every year. And if the Liaison Office officials returned Tong's hospitality and played host to him for a similar number of times, they should have met even more frequently. For the sake of comparison, it would be helpful if the ICAC could let the public know how many times Tong during his five-year term met with Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, who as Chief Executive was his direct supervisor.

In addition, according to the data supplied by the ICAC to the Legislative Council Finance Committee, of the approximately $220,000 worth of gifts that Tong gave away, 14 were for officials of the Liaison Office, and they included ICAC pens worth $1,665 each and ICAC commemorative shields worth $290 each.

Why did Tong meet with Liaison Office officials so frequently? The principal functions of the ICAC are to fight corruption, to promote anti-corruption education, and to receive visitors and share with them its experience in fighting corruption. It would, of course, be reasonable if Liaison Office officials wanted to have a general understanding of the ICAC. However, in view of the frequency of Tong's meetings with them and the fact that Huang Lanfa and Xie Xiaoqing were Tong's most regular guests, it is hardly plausible that the meetings were simply for a general understanding or introduction of the ICAC. As the work of the ICAC has nothing in common with that of the Liaison Office, why did Tong frequently meet with Liaison Office officials? If this is not clearly accounted for, can the public be blamed for having all sorts of speculations?

The "ICACgate", which happened in Tong's term of office, has seriously impaired the image and public credibility of the ICAC. The way to solve the crisis lies in one sentence: honesty is the best policy. Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and the ICAC should, following this policy, take practical remedial measures so that the public and the international community will know the ICAC is still there to fight corruption.

Yesterday, in answering media enquiries, Peh Yun-lu said, "I cannot control what my successors may do, but I can at least have a legacy of my own to pass on". However, the performance of the ICAC should not depend on individual heads, and Peh has the duty to strengthen the ICAC's operational system so that the commission may always be well governed.

The Chief Executive is the direct supervisor of the ICAC Commissioner. To avoid the suspicion of interfering with the Commission's work, Hong Kong's past governors and chief executives tended to leave the ICAC to handle its own affairs. However, things have changed so rapidly that practices established thirty-nine years ago, when the ICAC was founded, may not meet today's needs adequately. It is time for Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying to consider giving the ICAC a complete overhaul and make what changes necessary for the perfection of its anti-corruption functions.

明報社評 2013.04.25﹕湯顯明中聯辦互動頻仍 所為何事廉署須講清楚

前任廉政專員湯顯明在任期間，有關廉署酬酢和送禮的不當開支，挫傷了公衆對廉署的信任；昨日，現任廉政專員白韞六表示將以大公無私原則，全面配合立法會議員跟進事件，白韞六這個態度值得肯定。

湯顯明任內5年酬酢資料，其中宴請中聯辦官員超過20次，宴請對象主要是中聯辦副主任黃蘭發和警務聯絡部部長謝小青，即每年平均有4次這類活動，若中聯辦禮尚往來，以同樣次數回請湯顯明，則雙方接觸就更多更密。特首是廉政專員的頂頭上司，湯顯明任內見過曾蔭權多少次，廉署應該提供相關資料作比對。

另外，從廉署提交給立法會財務委員會披露送禮總值約22萬元的明細文件，其中受禮「中聯辦官員」有14筆，價值由1665元的廉署紀念筆和290元的廉署盾牌都有。

湯顯明與中聯辦官員互動，所為何事？廉署工作主要是肅貪倡廉、推動廉潔教育、接待訪客介紹經驗等，中聯辦官員想了解其工作梗概，可以理解；但是，以湯顯明與中聯辦官員互動次數、宴請對象基本上集中黃蘭發和謝小青兩人，若說見面目的只是為了解和介紹廉署一般工作，不合情理。然則，廉署工作與中聯辦應無交集，湯顯明與中聯辦官員卻互動頻仍，所為何事，若不交代清楚，難免使人有諸多聯想。

湯顯明任內出現的「廉政門」，嚴重衝擊廉署的形象和公信力，能夠化解這場危機的做法，只有一句話，就是：「誠實是最好的政策」，期望特首梁振英與廉署本諸這個精神，以切實舉措，讓市民與國際社會知道廉署仍然在肅貪倡廉。

昨日，白韞六回答傳媒提問時，也只能說「未來專員怎麼做，我難以控制，但是起碼留下了我的做法」。我們認為，良好的廉署運作，不能靠人治，白韞六有責任強化廉署制度之治。

特首是廉政專員的直屬上司，歷任港督、特首為了避嫌，鮮有過問廉署的事，不過，當年成立廉署的一些特定做法，39年後是否足以應對日新月異的情况，值得討論。特首梁振英應該想一想，是否要對廉署作一次全身體檢，完善其肅貪倡廉職能，現在是作出改變的適當時候。