Public Eye

Why different treatment for different children?

PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 27 November, 2013, 3:27am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 27 November, 2013, 3:27am

Children from the city's so-called ethnic minorities must be wondering what's wrong with them. They've watched as senior officials go one extra mile after another to accommodate children born in Hong Kong to mainland parents, the latest being to arrange Hong Kong's curriculum in Shenzhen primary schools for them. And ethnic minority children? Well, they're herded into apartheid-like "designated schools" with a curriculum that leaves them ill-prepared to fit into society. These children were born here to parents with residency rights; they have far more claim to being true Hongkongers than those born to mainland parents with no residency rights here. Yet officials and legislators bend over backwards for mainland children but ignore the needs of those from ethnic minorities. Do we smell the stench of racism?


TVB-Next Media dispute reveals double standards

TVB is put through the meat-grinder for airing an episode about failed television licence applicant Ricky Wong Wai-kay on its Scoop talk show. Critics pummel the show for its alleged bias. Pan-democrats join the stoning. The Journalists Association stays silent rather than stick up for TVB's media freedom rights. Next Media's Apple Daily launches multiple attacks on TVB's so-called TV hegemony, urging readers to boycott the station's 46th anniversary show. TVB retaliates by banning Next Media reporters from its station. The Journalists Association suddenly finds its voice and attacks TVB for violating media freedom. Democratic Party leader Emily Lau Wai-hing likewise chastises TVB in an interview with the station. Has Public Eye missed something here? When TVB does a show seen as critical of Wong, it's labelled as biased. When Apple Daily uses screaming headlines urging people to boycott TVB's show, it's called press freedom. When TVB retaliates, it's a violation of media freedom. You can call it whatever you want. We call it sickening double standards.


Stop-and-search law outrageous, oppressive

Public Eye has never been stopped and searched by our often heavy-handed police force. But we've seen others being frisked on the streets, and it's a humiliating experience. We've said before it's outrageous that officers can stop anyone, at any time, any place, for no reason at all. Latest stop-and-search figures clearly back what we say about them harassing innocent people. Police conducted a jaw-dropping 1,637,334 such checks last year, but only one in 113 led to crime detection. Oppressive - that's what it is when officers harass 112 innocent people to catch one crook. The law gives them the power to stop and search anyone who "acts in a suspicious manner" or those they think are crooks or about to commit a crime. Well, in that case, our officers are dunderheads who can't tell the difference between an innocent person and one who's acting in a suspicious manner. If they could, they wouldn't have to stop 113 people to hit jackpot. Where are all our legislators who so like to proclaim their human rights credentials? Why are they so silent on this police abuse of innocent people? Maybe they're preoccupied with far more important things, such as television licences.