涼亭 vs 銅像

若果公共空間是你們的設求﹐則舊涼亭沒有任何必需要保留的理由﹐只要新的涼亭有同樣或更好的公共空間功用。你們要爭取的不是不拆﹐而是參與公共空間的設計。

史料鉤沉：葛量洪一九五六年告別演說

以下是葛量洪一九五六年在立法會的告別演辭節錄，他將維多利亞公園視為自己其中一項代表作。五十年前的「形象工程」與今日的「西九」和「港深合體」比較，好太多了。

Honourable Members: It cannot be gainsaid, I am sure, that the ten years since I first presided at this Council on the 31st day of July, 1947 have been tremendous years in the life of Hong Kong. What developments there have been, what growth and what problems! First of all, of course, there was the rehabilitation, the reparation of the damage and ravages of the war and the Japanese occupation. It is difficult to realize now that on liberation 70% of the European style residences and 20% of the tenements were unfit for human habitation. Our school buildings were largely destroyed, the University was but an empty shell.

The work of restoration was already in full swing when I arrived. It has long since been completed but how much more has been accomplished. We
should really compare the Hong Kong of today with the Hong Kong of 1941. The difference is remarkable and yet it is a span of 16 years only. Consider the
buildings, the schools, the hospitals, the skyscrapers of office blocks and domestic flats, Victoria Park, North Point Housing Estate, Tai Lam Reservoir, the development of the New Territories, the factories whose output today accounts for nearly one-third of our exports. Much of all this has been done since 1951 and this is the more remarkable because during this time we were flooded out with refugees while simultaneously our trade was being penalized as a result of the United Nations and United States embargoes on trade with China.

How has this been done, and who has done it? The answer to that is the people of Hong Kong. What is their peculiar genius? Is it not their industry, their intelligence and their ingenuity? I think it is and besides this they are realists. They get on with the job, there is an absence of humbug about them and they are imbued with the spirit of co-operation. Furthermore it has always been a
tradition of Hong Kong to let the genius of its people work to their own advantage and hence to the advantage of the community generally, without their
initiative being frustrated by an excess of state planning.

Nevertheless, although a great deal has been accomplished we, or rather you, as I am shortly passing from the scene, must not be complacent for much more remains to be done. The airport is not completed, the new Kowloon Hospital has not yet been physically started, the Kwong Wah Hospital has hardly got to the planning stage, more schools are needed, the city hall has not been commenced. The list is indeed a formidable one. Planning will have to go on and on and on.

Here I might mention development of Tai Po, Gin Drinkers Bay, Junk Bay, Tide Cove, schemes which, as was announced a few days ago, are shortly to be
examined in detail with a view to the early implementation of one or more of them and the later implementation of the others if found practicable. These are within the realm of actualities and they will open up considerable areas. But still in the dream stage is the development of High Island which might well accommodate a satellite town of a half a million people.

I pass to constitutional matters, in particular those affecting this Council. A moment ago I mentioned that one of the characteristics of the people of Hong Kong was their realism. They are not taken in by catchwords such as democracy. Not that democracy is not a very fine thing: it is. But many
people use it as a catchword and make a mistake of regarding it as an end in itself, whereas it is only one of the means to an end, that end being individual freedom and liberty. And here in Hong Kong despite the fact that the constitution of this
Council and of Executive Council is not democratic, I venture to say in the words of a noted American writer, that Hong Kong is one of the most live and let live places in the world. Liberty and freedom are actualities.

As regards this Council, it is sometimes stated that the Unofficial Members are stooges of the Government and almost in the same breath that the
Government is but the mouthpiece of big business. These conflicting statements cannot both be true. In point of fact, neither is. Having worked with the Members of this Council for ten years I
have the highest regard for them, for their integrity and for the intelligent and unremitting way in which they strive for the good of the Colony. Without giving away State secrets I may tell you that in no single case, to my knowledge,
has it ever happened on Executive Council that the Official Members have voted one way and the Unofficial Members the other. On Legislative Council this happened only once. In short, on both Councils we work as a team. One thought concerning Legislative Council, however, remains, and that is this.

Would the authorities in London pay greater heed to Hong Kong and its just claims if the Council, which in this connexion means the Unofficial Members
thereof, were to be more vocal in pressing those claims than has been the tradition in the past? I leave the thought, which is not original or unique with me, with honourable Members......

香港獨立媒體 - Comments for "庶民政治系列──涼亭被拆，女王像長存"

涼亭 vs 銅像

史料 鉤沉：葛量洪一九五六年告別演說

史料鉤沉：葛量洪一九五六年告別演說