莫乃光議會速遞 Charles Mok LegCo e-Bulletin

各位IT界朋友:

電視發牌三揀二  行會黑箱作業!

政府再次令香港市民失望,行政會議原則上批准有線旗下的奇妙電視,以及電訊盈科旗下的香港電視娛樂兩個免費電視牌照的申請,只有王維基的香港電視的申請落空。隨後,香港電視即宣布裁減約320名員工,其中包括IT部門人員。

自2011 年中,前廣管局完成審核三個牌照申請,議決向行政會議呈交發三個免費電視廣播牌照的建議,將香港的免費電視台數目由兩個增加至五個。然而,今屆行政會議突 然使出殺手鐧──顧問報告,突指分析過一籃子因素,決定選擇性發牌,最終只發出兩個新牌照,篩走了香港電視。但是,到底顧問以甚麽準則評估,是否受到甚麼 外力的左右,而得出要避免「影響競爭環境的觀點?行政會議又如何得出要「循序漸進」、「三個只能活兩個」的決定?


香 港通訊業監管和決策一向重視「公平、客觀」,說了「開放天空」怎能在沒有公布下改變競賽規則,變作「選美」式競逐?政府近年屢次用公帑做的顧問報告,卻不 公開內容!香港電視「輸」在哪裡,如不完完整整、透明公開地向社會交代,反而以行會保密原則做擋箭牌,香港的法治就淪為人治!對有意發展創意產業的人,更 是猶如掌摑幾十巴掌!


接下來,政府將會處理無綫及亞視的續牌申請,就此我已在上星期首次會議提出口頭質詢,但得不到滿意的答覆。為什麼電訊頻譜可以拍賣,電視頻譜卻千秋萬世?我將會繼續就免費電視牌照事宜質詢政府,促請政府公開顧問報告,並且公開大氣電波。


另外,星期五我將聯同香港無線科技商會公布於9月中至10月初進行的《智能手機應用程式私隱意見調查》結果。本星期政府回答我的書面質詢時,表示無計劃諮詢公眾領域的個人資料使用,但不討論不代表問題不存在,我會繼續跟進,爭取對IT和應用開發者合理及有利的環境。




Charles Mok
莫乃光


發言片段

2013.10.09:《審批新股上市申請》的跟進質詢

2013.10.09:本地免費電視節目服務牌照的口頭質詢

2013.10.09:根據《立法會(權力及特權)條例》動議調查發展局局長陳茂波的議案發言

2013.10.09:就《制訂長遠基建規劃,推動可持續發展》提出修正案的發言

2013.10.16:就《對行政長官投不信任票》議案的發言(有關免費電視發牌事件)

2013.10.16:就《善用公共財政,加強香港經濟創意動力》提出修正案的發言


議會質詢

2013.10.09:本地免費電視節目服務牌照

2013.10.16:保障可在公共領域取得的個人資料


議案修正案

2013.10.09:《制訂長遠基建規劃,推動可持續發展》議案修正案 (被否決)

2013.10.16:《善用公共財政,加強香港經濟創意動力》議案修正案 (獲通過)


議案發言稿

2013.10.09:根據《立法會(權力及特權)條例》動議調查發展局局長陳茂波的議案發言稿

2013.10.09:《制訂長遠基建規劃,推動可持續發展》議案的修正案發言稿

2013.10.16:《對行政長官投不信任票》的議案發言稿

2013.10.16:《善用公共財政,加強香港經濟創意動力》議案的修正案發言稿


資本壹週專欄—立會珠璣

2013.09.26:企業資訊總監「唔易做」

2013.10.03:設立科技局 還要拖多久?

2013.10.10:改變管治思維 扶助本港資訊科技產業



Dear IT friends,

Selective TV licensing: And we can't even ask why?


The government has failed the Hong Kong people again. The Executive Council decided to approve in principle new domestic free TV licenses to Fantastic TV (under Cable TV) and HK Television Entertainment (under PCCW), but not Mr Ricky Wong's Hong Kong Television Network (HKTVN). After that, HKTVN announced the layoff of 320 staff members, including some of its IT people.


Since mid-2011, the former Broadcasting Authority has finished the above three license applications, and recommended to Exco to grant licenses to all three applicants, hence increasing the number of domestic free television operators from two to five. Yet, the Exco of the current administration pulled a stunt on the expected result -- a consultancy report that suddenly overrode the previous decision by the regulator, citing a "basket" of factors, to reject one of the applicants, HKTVN. But what are the assumptions and standards taken by the consultant? Were there external interference causing Exco to change the rules at last minute?


Hong Kong's communications industry has always benefitted from the government's open and objective policy decision mechanism. How can the government change its announced "open sky" policy suddenly and without any previous notice, and replace it with a "beauty contest" regime? The government has repeatedly used last-minute consultancy reports that are not released to the public to abruptly change policy directions, to the chagrin of the industry. The government must disclose the reasons for its decision and not use "Exco confidentiality clause" as its defence. Otherwise, our rule of law will be relegated to the rule of one man, not to mention that it will be a slap on the face to all of us who want to develop our creative industry.


The government will now have to handle the renewal of the licenses for TVB and ATV, a matter about which I have raised an oral question in the first Legco meeting this year. The government's answer was dissatisfactory. Why do we auction our spectrums for data and telephony services, but not for television? Why does TV licensees get to apparently keep their spectrums for eternity? I will continue to press the government to open its consultancy studies to us, and open our sky for more TV choices for our citizens too.


Also, on Friday, I will join with the Hong Kong Wireless Technology Industry Association to announce the results of the "Survey on Privacy of Smartphone Applications". In this week's Legco meeting, the government response to my written question on the use of personal data in the public domain was that there was no plan to consult on this matter. But that does not mean the problem isn't there. I will continue to press the government for action favorable and reasonable for an open environment for our IT and app developers.




Charles Mok
Charles Mok

Council Question

2013.10.09:Domestic free television programme service licences

2013.10.16:Protection of personal data accessible in the public domain


Motion Amendment

2013.10.09:Motion on “Formulating long-term infrastructure planning to promote sustainable development” (Amendment Negatived)

2013.10.16:Motion on “Optimizing public finances and enhancing the impetus for innovation in Hong Kong’s economy” (Amendment Passed)


Contact-Me

To subscribe, please click here.
若您想訂閱 Hon. Charles Mok's Official Website之電子報,請按這裡

To unsubscribe, please click here to unsubscribe.
若您想取消訂閱 Hon. Charles Mok's Official Website 之電子報,請按這裡