Wednesday, July 26, 2006

一切, 就源於投票資格制度有問題

Came across a rather interesting discussion in the 香港討論區 Forum:

http://www9.discuss.com.hk/viewthread.php?tid=
1911662&extra=page%3D1


我夠可以入去果o的學會做正式會員囉, 咁又點?
我點解要做果o的會o既會員, 先至可以投票先? 要每年俾會費去維持個會員資格, 間接「享有」投票權?
點解我唔可以用我的「工作經驗」同「學歷」, 去證明我有資格加入資訊科技界裡面投票先?

一切, 就源於投票資格制度有問題.....

Well said xita.

As for the main discussion of "單仲偕議員呀,咁多年你為資訊科技界做過什麼?"... I rather like the question: "咁你想佢做 d 咩, 可唔可以講講...." Good question chivan. Well, perhaps first of all, to do something about the eligibility structure of the IT functional constituency. Looking at the work SCK has done in the past, his records at the legco meetings, I think it is unfair to say that he hasn't contributed to the industry and HK in general. Nevertheless, the fact that there is a complete lack of any meaningful evolution of the eligibility requirements of the ITFC leaves much to be desired.

I will echo xita's sentiment to say that the eligibility should be based on being in the IT industry and not having to pay for membership in some association. There should be a simple process to identify and declare one as an IT professional to satisfy the eligibility requirement. This process should also be free.

Monday, July 24, 2006

GST for e-business

The following was proposed in the recent consultation document on GST from the HK gov:

(a) GST-registered businesses in Hong Kong making supplies of
goods, services or digitised products (e.g., downloaded software,
music or videos) ordered via the Internet and physically supplied to
or performed for local customers would be subject to GST;

(b) GST-registered businesses in Hong Kong making supplies of
goods, services or digitised products ordered via the Internet and
physically supplied to customers outside Hong Kong would be zero
rated under the export rules (see part (g) below);

(c) goods purchased via the Internet and imported into Hong Kong
would be subject to GST, if the value of the goods were in excess
of the exemption threshold for low-value cargo (proposed to be
$4,000)21;

(d) GST would not be payable on imported services or digitised
products that were purchased from a non-Hong Kong supplier, if
that supplier did not carry on a business in Hong Kong; and

(e) all transactions of immovable property in Hong Kong (if taxable)
would be subject to GST irrespective of where, or through what
means, these transactions were performed.

In general, the concept seems viable, and I do support exploring a GST structure which will allow for better allocation of resources by the government. That being said, the key issue is that it seems the government lack confidence from the people to execute well. Especially when the accountability to the general constituency is in question.

(d) above is also problematic. If I read it correctly, it means that imported digital goods and services are GST exempted. If that is the case, there is no reason why HK shops would not export its digital goods and then directly sell it from a foreign site (hence becoming a "foreign supplier"). The fact that these are virtual goods mean that there is essentially negligible transport cost.

Overall, the biggest probelm with the GST proposal is the lack of exploration of other options. With the incredible volume of treasury reserve in HK, there is some obligation to take a look at improving the ROI on capital revenues. The consultation paper completely ignored other ways to broaden the revenue base of the government and only provided a comparison of cutting personal allowances.

Furthermore, the premise for revenue-neutrality from tax is completely unacceptable. The aim should be to reduce overall tax! With the treasury reserve in HK, the outlook for the economy, the government should have the ability to run a deficit budget (that is very different than a budget deficit) and utilize some of its capital leverage. With GST, there should be room to reduce income taxes even further than suggested so that there is a net reduction in taxation from the people.

Again, I support exploring GST, but with the few fundamental issues and lack of analysis, it will probably need serious work before any progress could be seen.

Friday, July 21, 2006

Public consulted on election guidelines

Site: http://www.eac.gov.hk/en/ecse/ecse_proposedguide.htm
Guidelines: http://www.eac.gov.hk/en/ecse/ecse_guide.htm

...The Electoral Affairs Commission (EAC) today (July 15) released the proposed guidelines on Election-related Activities in respect of the Election Committee (EC) Subsector Elections. The guidelines will be available for public consultation until August 14... http://www.eac.gov.hk/doc/ecse/2006/0715_e.doc

Simple Principles of Fairness

The 2 most important fairness principles in my mind are:
- that eligibility requirements should be largely similar
- one should not have to pay membership fees to join an association for whom he/she would not have to join otherwise to carry out his/her profession in the industry

The current system fails both of these principles.

What is worse is that because of the discrepancy in eligibility requirements, a structural inequity is inevitably created, providing unfair bias for candidates affiliated with lower barrier membership groups. Whereas a low-barrier organization can potentially wield undue influence by "accrediting" its members to be eligible voters.

The IT Constituency Needs a Fairer Eligibility Criteria

The calling for this site is rather obvious, and I tried to make it clear in the header banner. The election process in HK is very skewed in my mind. It is confusing and hard to participate. Most of the friends I have talked to in the IT industry have no idea that it is so complicated to become a registered voter in the IT functional constituency (ITFC). Even when people want to participate, the barriers are high. Why should the participation barriers be high? Is it that we do not want more people to participate?

Some other people think that the ITFC is already very "liberal", in that there are many personal votes vs. company votes. I disagree. In fact, I do not mind having corporate votes, in my mind, corporations are legal entities and if they have legal obligations why not have rights? I am not making a definitive argument for or against corporate votes here, but I think it deserves due exploration. What we have today is definitely not one which can reflect the will of the constituency. Or at least the structure is not one that is convincing.

The strangest thing is that for ITFC one has to join some arbitrary club or association to become eligible. Not only that, based on my limited knowledge, it seems that the criteria for being "eligible" is different for each organization you choose. Some requires multi-years of experience, some requires little more than a declaration, some requires tenure or exams... all in all, not every group is equal.

The system is simply not fair. The IT industry is one that is growing in size and in importance in HK as we move into the knowledge economy. A reflective electorial structure is important for the industry to voice its concerns and provide needed support to the administration governance in HK.