終於要公佈 我地搬左啦 面對業主從沒對疫情減過分毫以黎 我地每日都面對龐大既經濟壓力 每月六位數字的支出 終於 我地抵受唔住

慶幸TP還在 搬左去一個比較小既地方 但我地仍然希望盡量將本來所有維持原狀 慶幸 我地仍然有大大片既窗 仲有2間房 有需要可以打通做一間 無左common area 但仍有一個迷你cafe 男女共用更衣室 3個沖涼同2個廁所 係仍未搵到新清潔姐姐前 衛生仍由我一個人負責 甘大個女都未洗過廁所 有咩做得唔好請見諒🙏

我地仍然希望可以盡量比最好既野比大家 所以所有原用既props我地都會繼續保持 目前每日都仍然有啲鑽牆時候 因為仲有好多野要細執 亦希望可以偷多啲收納空間 新手唔太識用電鑽 進度比較慢 多多包涵 Namaste 🙏

明天會更好❤️

Reposed @thepracticegroup

We’ve Moved!

During the closure for the pandemic, we were busily packing and moving. Now we are settling in a new location which is closer to the centre of Central.

Simply hop onto the CML Escalator and walk down the stairs next to Marks&Spencer on Hollywood Road, we are there waiting for you across the road.

Address: 4/F, C Wisdom Centre, 35-37 Hollywood Road.

———————
Moving Promotions

For our new moving, we are extending both Promotions of New Student & Reopening Renewal for one more month.

New Students Promotion:
Students who are new to our studio, to encourage you to begin practice, you get 5 extra classes for getting a 10 class package.

Reopening Renewal:
To top-up your unlimited packages for 6month up now, you will enjoy an extra month credit.

Contact us at +852 9855 7693 / Email us for any inquiries.

Thank you for staying with us🙏🏻

蕭叔叔短評被譽為「人生有呢種朋友不枉此生」的黃仁龍那十頁紙求情信

全文：

http://m.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20170220/s00001/1487583133001

（報章轉載錯漏不少，敬請留意）

I have known Mr Donald Tsang since 2005. As Secretary for Justice (SJ), I worked closely with Donald as Chief Executive (CE) between October 2005 and June 2012. In addition to official dealings, I consider Donald to be a good friend and someone I admire for his dedication to public service.

Donald's over 40 years of service and contribution to Hong Kong is a matter of public record. Others will speak to his key role in helping Hong Kong weather through stormy financial crises. Here I would refer to his significant contributions to the public based on my own personal experience particularly in the area of the rule of law in Hong Kong.

During my 7-year tenure as SJ, I had on numerous occasions tendered legal advice to Donald as CE. He would sometimes debate with me and test the basis of the advice; but he has never acted against such legal advice. This in itself is a remarkable attribute as the head of the HKSAR.

Donald always said to me the Governors he previously worked with, however headstrong, would always abide by the legal advice of the Attorney General, and it is important that the CE of the HKSAR should stay that way.

Congo Case

One of the most important tasks, if not the most important task, of the CE of HKSAR is to faithfully and effectively implement the principle of “one country, two systems.” The power of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) to interpret the Basic Law and its exercise have always been considered a major challenge to the post-1997 constitutional order.

During my tenure as SJ, the NPCSC interpreted the Basic Law once in 2011. That was upon the reference by the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) on the question of state immunity. The issue in the case is whether the People’s Republic of China’s doctrine of absolute immunity (under which no foreign state can be sued in the court at all) should be followed in Hong Kong. Prior to 1997, Hong Kong’s common law provided for restrictive immunity, where foreign states could be sued if the dispute arouse out of commercial transactions.

The HKSAR Government lost in the Court of First Instance and in the Court of Appeal. If the Government were to lose again in the CFA, it could stir up serious political and economic repercussions for China particularly vis-à-vis her African friends. National interest of China was at stake. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was understandably very concerned.

Immense political pressure mounted. There were suggestions that Beijing should not take any risk but should consider taking more definitive measures such as an interpretation of the Basic Law before the appeal was heard. If that were to happen, on the eve of the appeal hearing, the damage to judicial independence would not be less than an overriding post-judgment interpretation.

I cannot go into further details for confidentiality reasons. However, I can testify that Donald has been solid and staunch in endorsing my stance against any extra-judicial measure in view of its adverse impact on the rule of law.

Owing in no small part to Donald’s endorsement and resolve, the Central People’s Government (CPG) was content to trust the HKSAR Government and the CFA, and to leave the appeal to be heard by the highest court, despite grave risk and many conflicting views given by others. At the end, the Government won in the CFA by a majority of 3 to 2. The Court further referred the relevant Basic Law provisions to Beijing for interpretation, as required under Article 158 of the Basic Law, before pronouncing the final judgment. A huge constitutional crisis was warded off. The rule of law had prevailed.

Over this difficult episode, I know Donald had been under tremendous pressure. I remember often times he suffered from acute acid reflux before and after major discussions. Yet he stood firm throughout.

As CE, Donald had faithfully discharged the indispensable trust reposed by both the CPG and by Hong Kong. He had the courage to stand by what he believes to be right and the ability to address mutual concerns and to strengthen mutual understanding. He had performed well the crucial bridging role in the two-way process under “one country, two systems” at critical times.

Constitutional Reform

There was another important event in which Donald’s principled stance had been vital in achieving a favourable result for Hong Kong: constitutional reform.

Although no change could be made of the imminent 2017 CE election method due to the set-backs in 2016, during Donald’s tenure as CE, he has been made significant contributions toward moving Hong Kong closer to universal suffrage.

The first landmark was achieved, with tremendous efforts by the core team under Donald’s lead, when the NPCSC delivered its decision in December 2007 setting out “the timetable” and “road map” for universal suffrage in terms of the elections of CE and Legco.

Second, in 2010, the Government managed to secure Legco’s support to pass the 2012 constitutional reform package. Here, Donald had played a pivotal role, one perhaps not many are aware of.

Whether the 2012 reform package could be passed in 2010 was crucial to ensure “gradual and orderly progress” and that the next round (i.e. the intended goals of universal suffrage in electing CE in 2017) could be achieved.

In June 2010, the original government proposal was losing support and hope was vanishing for it to be passed at Legco. Time was running out. Whether to modify the package by incorporating a proposal of the Democratic Party (i.e. the additional 5 District Council Functional Constituency seats to be elected by over 3 million electorate, “the new DCFC election method”) appeared to be the lynchpin.

Without going into details again for confidentiality reasons, I can again testify that the make-or-break moment was when Donald made the timely and difficult decision to revise the package by incorporating the new DCFC election method. It was an agonizing decision for him as he had to override certain internal opposition and to risk personal credibility and trust before the CPG. As an insider, I know that decision was not a political manoeuvre but a selfless act for the sake of the long-term wellbeing of Hong Kong and the smooth transition toward universal suffrage.

Son of Hong Kong

Donald is truly a “son of Hong Kong” (香港仔). His genuine concern for the public good is most vividly demonstrated when Hong Kong was caught in crises of one kind of another.

Hong Kong went through attacks of avian flu and swine flu. Donald tirelessly headed the cross-bureau task forces and chaired long and intensive meetings. I remember more than once Donald being caught in very heated debates with colleagues, pushing them to the limit to mobilize maximum resources and manpower, in order to give the public maximum protection against these outbreaks. He would grill colleagues over thorny issues such as requisitioning hotels as places of quarantine, not satisfied with the usual civil service response of reluctance, as lives of many were at stake.

Over the Manila hostage incident in August 2010, Donald vigorously pressed the President of the Philippines for full investigation, joining the victims’ families and the rest of Hong Kong to cry for justice, although his action raised eyebrows as foreign affairs strictly is a matter of the CPG under Article 13 of the Basic Law.

Donald had a strong concern for young people. During my tenure, exceptionally I was commissioned to chair a Steering Committee to combat drug abuse by youth. The public might not realize this initiative in fact came from Donald. He was deeply concerned and alarmed by the reports reflecting the seriousness of the problem. He was determined to tackle the problem pro-actively. The Steering Committee was unprecedented, involving concerted and strategic efforts of different departments and bureaus. More importantly, Donald was instrumental in putting in substantial and sustainable resources to strengthen the efforts. The figures of reported drug abusers, particularly among young abusers, have seen significant decline in the past few years.

Other contributions on the rule of law

There was no shortage of controversial cases involving judicial reviews and fundamental human rights. Amidst other voices and political pressure, Donald had fully taken on board the legal position that the Government has a positive duty to protect such rights, including taking reasonable and appropriate measures to enable lawful demonstrations to take place peacefully.

Further, Donald also readily took on my advice regarding procedural fairness in handling Government businesses with quasi-judicial element such as administrative appeals.

Donald truly believes in judicial independence. He assured me repeatedly the independent and internationally renowned Judiciary in the HKSAR is our pride and the cornerstone of our success. His personal commitment to this cause is manifested in his positive response in acceding to many recommendations of the Mason Report endorsed by the Standing Committee on Judicial Salaries and Conditions of Service.

Furthermore, his conviction on the importance of the law as Hong Kong’s assets was amply manifested in his exceptional support in the development of Hong Kong’s capacity as an international arbitration centre. Donald was very understanding on the need of expansion on this front and had put in personal efforts to make it happen. He was instrumental in enabling resources are in place to secure additional space for the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, and to procure the arbitration arm of the International Chamber of Commerce and the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission to set up regional offices in Hong Kong.

A fair man who has given much to the public

Before joining the Government, I was an Election Committee member of the Legal Subsector elected on the same ticket as Ms Audrey Eu, Mr Alan Leong and other vocal barristers. In that capacity, in 2005, I first met Donald in an election forum where I questioned him harshly and criticised the Government’s earlier attitude over certain rule of law issues. Instead of bearing any grudge, in the late summer of 2005, Donald invited me to take up the post as SJ, assuring me that he would give me full support in upholding the rule of law in Hong Kong. That quality of fairness in Donald and that personal assurance to me have never slackened in the following 7 years in which I served in his cabinet.

As CE of the HKSAR, Donald had truly poured himself out. I strongly believe his significant contributions to Hong Kong in the past over 4 decades should be properly recognized.

Dated the 20th day of Februray 2017.

Wong Yan Lung SC

- See more at: http://m.mingpao.com/ins/instantnews/web_tc/article/20170220/s00001/1487583133001#sthash.0nwGN3QA.dpuf

【傑哥給香港人寫的《香港家書》】
Alan Leong Kah-Kit 梁家傑：

//梁家傑最後一次以公民黨黨魁身份給香港人寫的《香港家書》，點出香港走到當下分崩離析的主因，並指出當面對專制強權時香港人的兩種基本取態，分別是犬儒認命和赤子初衷。他寄望下一屆特首能處理好香港人哪被出賣和挫折感覺。傑哥望中共明白，要香港人能同心同德，要香港能政通人和，不是靠強權鎮壓；根據回歸時承諾香港人的「一國兩制，高度自治，港人治港」調整對港政策，貫徹落實香港人對回歸的想像和初衷，把張曉明和梁振英亂港之局撥亂反正，才是大道正途。//

《香港家書》連結：https://goo.gl/YqNnE6

傑哥最後一次以公民黨黨魁身份給香港人寫的《香港家書》，點出香港走到當下分崩離析的主因，並指出當面對專制強權時香港人的兩種基本取態，分別是犬儒認命和赤子初衷。他寄望下一屆特首能處理好香港人哪被出賣和挫折感覺。傑哥望中共明白，要香港人能同心同德，要香港能政通人和，不是靠強權鎮壓；根據回歸時承諾香港人的「一國兩制，高度自治，港人治港」調整對港政策，貫徹落實香港人對回歸的想像和初衷，把張曉明和梁振英亂港之局撥亂反正，才是大道正途。
要收聽梁家傑親自讀出《給香港的信》，請點擊以下連結：http://programme.rthk.hk/channel/radio/programme.php…

LETTER TO HONG KONG
Hon Alan Kah-kit LEONG SC
Leader, Civic Party
September 18, 2016

Dear Fellow Hongkongers,

This will be the last Letter to Hong Kong I wrote as Leader of the Civic Party. My term as a Legislative Councillor will end in just less than a fortnight’s time, on September 30. Looking back at my twelve years as a legislator, I am thankful for the trust you have reposed in me. I sought public office in 2004 so that I could do my utmost to uphold the Hong Kong System according to what Hongkongers had been promised by the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law. And, in particular, I had wanted to see implemented in Hong Kong universal suffrage for election of the Chief Executive and all members of the Legislative Council. 1997 saw Hong Kong revert to a Sovereign that practises People’s Democratic Dictatorship, and autocracy is the order of the day in Mainland China. Without a local government that is fully accountable to Hongkongers, our long cherished freedoms and institutions like the Rule of Law, apolitical Civic Service and Independent Commission Against Corruption are bound to wither and cannot stay.

It is regrettable that the Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”), thus the Central People’s Government, has not honoured the One Country Two Systems constitutional order as promised by and enshrined in the Basic Law. One only has to remind oneself of the black and white letters of Article 22 to tell how flagrantly the Basic Law has been breached. The Article provides that
“No department of the Central People’s Government and no province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central People’s Government may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this Law.”

Only as recently as the Legislative Council Elections on September 4, interventions from Zhang Xiao-Ming, the Director of the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in Hong Kong, were rampant. The Liaison Office bent over backwards to make sure that people like Tse Wai Chun Paul, Yung Hoi Yan, Ho Kwan Yiu, Leung Mei Fun and Chow Ho Ding Holden were elected. Such manoeuvres had gone so far that cost the seats of Anti-Democracy incumbents Wong Kwok Hing and Tang Ka Piu from The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions, the most ancient supporters of the CCP in Hong Kong. And, those blessed by the Liaison Office are not slow to show their gratitude by thanking Zhang Xiao-Ming for his support, as if these were normal business, and conveniently forgetting all about the non-intervention guaranteed by Article 22.

On the subject of the treachery of the CCP, how can Hongkongers forget about the White Paper published by the State Council on June 10, 2014 and the Resolutions of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee (“NPCSC”) on August 31? By the former, the CCP emphasized its total control over Hong Kong and the self-restraints this omnipotent sovereign had enticed Hongkongers into expecting was shattered by the stroke of a pen. By the latter, the CCP unequivocally denied to Hongkongers our right to elect the Chief Executive, with anyone allowed to stand.
Public outrage over the White Paper and the NPCSC Resolutions prompted the Umbrella Movement later in 2014. Thoroughfares in the heart of the city were occupied for 79 days. The Umbrella Movement has moved the world by showcasing how David can stand up against Goliath using peaceful means and by engaging in rational debates. Hongkongers have shown the world that giving in and foregoing principles is not the only option when facing up to the CCP. While it draws the world’s appreciation, the Umbrella Movement has to date failed to move the Beijing Leadership an iota towards fulfilling its promises made in the 1980s to Hongkongers in its bid to entice us to accepting reversion to Chinese Sovereignty.

During the past four years with C Y Leung as the Chief Executive, Hong Kong saw our society being torn apart and polarized. Such a divide is getting wider by the day and one doubts if it can ever be mended, at least so long as C Y Leung stays.

At one pole are cynics or pragmatists who have long resigned to succumbing to the CCP and reaping whatever benefits they can by dancing to its tunes or even second guessing what the Beijing masters would like to see them do. Many of them, now occupying key positions in government and the civil society, contribute to the daily deterioration of Hong Kong’s core values and corruption of Hong Kong’s key institutions.

At the other pole are childish and naïve souls who, following our more elemental instincts, refuse to forget our original intentions and wanting to see implemented the vision we have been promised, namely, One Country Two Systems, High Degree of Autonomy and Hong Kong People Ruling Hong Kong. We want our long-cherished freedoms and well-respected institutions to continue to flourish for the benefit of many more generations to come.

Personalities dictate our destinies. When coming face to face with the adversity of suppression and overwhelmed by an apparently unmatchable power, individuals do react differently. I certainly would love to see more of the naïve souls and less of the cynics. It is not just our personal destinies that are at stake; Hong Kong’s fate is in the balance.

Elections of the Sixth Legislative Council, which completed on September 4, broke many records. 58%, or 2.2 million, of our registered voters came out to vote, which is unprecedented. Legislators-Elect include Law Kwun Chung, Lau Siu Lai, Shiu Ka Chun and Cheng Chung Tai, who were core participants and very much involved in the 79 days of Occupy. Hongkongers have voted them into office so that they are properly mandated to continue fighting for a democratic Hong Kong, in the spirit of the Umbrella Movement. Besides, Chu Hoi Dick Eddie and Yiu Chung Yim have been civil society activists who see as their mission to deliver a fairer and more equal Hong Kong.

These six, together with other Democratic Legislators-Elect, have all openly declared frustration with what they are seeing of Hong Kong, and, to different extents and degrees, are advocating for Hongkongers to take charge of Hong Kong’s fate beyond 2047. The numbers of Democratic versus Anti-Democratic Legislators in the new Council will be 30:40. It will be politically impossible, or at least very unwise, for the CCP to ignore the voice of Hongkongers who have spoken through the ballot box and attempt to continue to suppress the Democratic Camp.

Engagement is the only reasonable way forward. The Civic Party has proposed a Hong Kong Affairs Conference, which should foot the bill in this connection and is worth serious consideration.

Just as I had told Zhang DeJiang, the President of the National People’s Congress, when we met a few months ago, the only way the CCP can prevent separatism from gaining popularity in Hong Kong is for it to deliver according to what has always been promised to Hongkongers by the Basic Law. If Xi Jinping stifles democracy even more, I can only predict that anger and frustration will grow, with separatist demands boosted.

Very soon, Hong Kong will elect 1,200 members to the Election Committee mandated to select the next Chief Executive who will assume office in 2017. The Democratic Camp is determined to win as many seats as practicable so as to be able to have a say in who is to be put at the helm for the next 5 years.

To me, Hong Kong has no luck at all if the incumbent stays on. He must go. Whoever is eyeing the top job must be able to deliver hope to especially the young, up-and-coming generations of Hong Kong and to mend the divided society with apt and timely messages capable of taking into account the public sentiments of betrayal and frustrations.

May I take this opportunity to wish you all the best and hope to continue to see you around. God Bless Hong Kong.