FS talks up imperialists' dragon in the face of Party ban
WHAT A BLESSING Financial Secretary Antony Leung Kam-chung is protected under 'one country, two systems', or heaven knows what fate might await him on his return from Europe.
In London earlier this week to launch the 'Brand Hong Kong' campaign, he extolled the virtues of the controversial dragon symbol - just as he was expected to do. Trouble is, as an alert sleuth for this column discovered while browsing through Chinese Communist Party documents, the mythical creature is something of a bete noir to the central Government.
The document, entitled 'Central Propaganda Department Notice on Forbidding the Use of Dragon to Symbolise China', (that's the kind of light reading Corridors eggheads take with them on holiday) says: 'The dragon symbol has long been associated with a feudal regime.
'Imperialists, too, have used the mythological creature to vilify China. The decree therefore prohibits the use of [the] dragon to symbolise China or the Chinese people in any publications, literature or paintings. The ban applies to all cultural activities and exhibitions, with the exception of the traditional dragon dance and dragon boat race.'
Oh dear! And there was our new finance wizard flaunting the brute in the very heartland of bygone colonialism. Mr Leung spent last week repeating the message in various major European capitals. Under the 'two systems' arrangement, Hong Kong can please itself about many things. But strictly speaking, this ventures into 'one country' territory. Maybe no one in Beijing knows about the law either. If they do, then they must be breathing fire . . .
After the debacle over Richard Li Tzar-kai's Stanford degree, or lack of, Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB) legislator Chan Kwok-keung joked to colleagues that he wanted to make certain his boy's qualifications were gilt-edged, so he flew over to attend his graduation ceremony in journalism from California State University.
A former textile worker, Mr Chan is proud of his son's academic achievement: 'I could not attend his secondary-school graduation, so I didn't want to miss the most important occasion of all,' the proud father told the Post on his return.
Cathay pilots have got a track record for pie-in-the-sky statements when describing their noble struggles against management. During the 1999 dispute, one of them memorably wrote an Internet rallying cry comparing the pilots with the students facing the tanks in Tiananmen Square 10 years earlier.
This time, to cut down on embarrassing gaffes that might diminish their already perilously low level of public support, the pilots have effectively shut down their public discussion Web site 'Fragrant Harbour' and shifted their discussions to a Web site that can only be accessed by Aircrew Officers Association members.
The move has been a success. But as Corridors has discovered, it hasn't stopped some of them from making themselves look ridiculous when they make the mistake of speaking to the press. One of them moaned to reporters this week: 'All my friends say 'you just press the autopilot'. But you can kill someone by pressing the wrong button.'
Another pilot compared his job with that of a surgeon and said: 'Surgeons get paid a lot but how come no one ever complains about them getting overpaid?' A third ventured: 'The managers are intensely jealous of our jobs but they don't have the guts to do our job and they probably don't have the talent. They think our jobs are very glamorous.'
Maybe the union should distribute gags to all its members before their next run-in with the management.
