Thursday, June 05, 2008

今日講乜好?

講鹿死?

舊年講左,今年唔得閑講(咁多)勒,因為要帶阿女睇醫生。好彩醫生話完全無事,只係鼻水流入喉嚨,引起咳嗽。(陰謀論指,醫生所言實暗諷為父者過分緊張)

講番題目,嗯,不如聽故仔啦。

講危機管理?

好彩,今年記得。如果唔係,真係講咩都冇用。

講遠行?

好耐未遠行過,好想,但冇機會。祝遠行者快樂,並找到遠行既意義。

講 Mobility?

忙。要執拾整理下。下星期先。

講 Politics?

九世前,曾說過:「office politics ... 未必 counter-productive」

唉,香妹,鎖你,搵日補番。

講犧牲?

雖然好似好嚴肅,但都想補充下(查實已經補充左):

好明白,愛有先後優次,也非常認同。

不過,災難,等同戰爭狀態。美國軍人於戰鬥中受傷,就可以獲得Purple Heart,毋須咩野戰功。佢地亦以Purple Heart的數量為榮。說回救人,對,表揚犧牲,可能好像政府沒有了解人民苦心,但要留意,「表揚犧牲」若被推論為「踐踏愛家護兒的平民百姓」,或「犧牲要蓋過了親情」又或等同「要忽略親人死活」,我很希望有如斯想法者,再次想想,是否真的如此。

留意這些所謂犧牲自己的親人成全他人的個案並不多,而且,希望看官沒有忽略到,其實他們選擇犧牲自己親人的背後,有著一個共通點,就是「自己的孩子救不了」。之所以說是選擇性宣傳的結果,而非價值觀出現問題,就是這個意思。人會救自己的孩子,只是宣傳沒有顧及到(或沒有使人留意到)。要怪責,我認為,不如怪責傳媒,官方的傳媒也好,民間的、香港的傳媒也好。這部分,我想強調的,乃「不是價值觀出現問題」。

大禹治水,的所謂典範,見仁見智。或許我那年真的沒有聽書,所以沒有留意到教科書有如此推崇。若教科書真的有,我想,三過家門不入的意義,在於「義」之於「情」之先。義者情者,孰先孰後,可以按照每件事情都不同。不過,作為管理者的選擇,只有向整體交待。所以不介意(甚至主動要求)把宣傳焦點投放在情況特別閃亮的人物身上。

曾經我廠內有保安員發現廠房失竊,馬上追趕賊人。作為廠方負責人,事後不得不表揚他們,否則便再沒有人為工廠賣力。可是在背後我要做的,就是暗地裏教訓他們,下次不要追(得太急),報警就可以,否則出現什麼血案,廠方和其他員工的情緒可有大麻煩(錢嘛,保險可以搞掂)。

在戰爭狀態中希望見到「人人自顧門前雪」?管理方便容易與否,若讓我來辦,這根本不在考慮之列,因為我會清楚知道,人是不容易放棄自己的價值觀的(尤其尤其尤其親情),所以根本毋須要替他們擔心,甚至擔心他們會只會「等別人來救你的親人」。作為管理者,看的,不是個人不同的價值觀,而是生命的保存。於我,一定用強,還要硬著心腸。除非,所有人不視災難為戰爭狀態。

至於那些受「錢捐得少還要捱罵」所害的,那只是害人者借機(錯誤地)自擡身價的事。一個處理,永遠有十萬種理解方式,而且各取所需。

好明白,愛有先後優次,也非常認同。也一直認同,沒有家,那有國?這句話,是自己說的,是自己持守保衛的。要我沒有家,我寧願沒有這個國。不過,若我為了其他事情,而放棄了「家」,你可曾想過其實我有我的苦衷嗎?

不過,若有人拿犧牲家人來炫耀,那才是價值觀的問題。

後補想講?

我後知後覺,依家至發覺原來我唔係咁認同早前已經通過左既食品標簽法,尤其係連讓少數食品獲得豁免呢個修訂都否決埋。

主要原因係我唔覺得全部食品都有標簽可以保障倒市民健康。而且,我好擔心,法例生效之後,香港仲會唔會有腐乳賣?

(言多必失,小弟定必銘記)

19 comments:

Karen (Sze) said...

我諗今日寫埋呢個comment後, 暫且要休假預備作戰, 等下星期二回來再講。

a)故仔
我睇o左, 想寫個問題俾作者(但係同魔術師不太熟, 唔好意思嘛), 問您都一樣: 您估間公司CEO有否重金聘請番個『襟錫』去收拾番個結局呢? 同埋, 呢件事, 我都係從朋友口中得悉疑似個案(9成係), 但對方打死都唔講公司名。

b)代moon姐講:CM, 您醒定d呀!
Anyway, 祝您氹moon姐開心。記住:有危就有機。

c)>>好耐未遠行過,好想,但冇機會。
同是天涯淪落人! 睇怕有排先有得去遠行!

d)講 Mobility?
Waiting for your reply.

e)office politics
有趣的topic, 是否counter-productive, 未必。 呢樣o野, 我以前覺得壞處好多, 但後來讀一些articles, 又好似未必。

f)>>早前已經通過左既食品標簽法,尤其係連讓少數食品獲得豁免呢個修訂都否決埋。
有次去W超市, 當時係見到有關Poster, 於是乎簽名支持讓少數食品獲得豁免。

一來如您所講, 唔覺得全部食品都有標簽可以保障倒市民健康(最好例子:低脂好立xvs紫色那個package的好立x, 唔記得個牌子名, 您compare下nutrition就知); 二來最重要的係消費者少了choices; 三來若然面臨一些副食品shortage, 法例生效就無得import那些被法例所reject的食品, 您話屆時supply緊要d, 還是label緊要d。

在營養角度而言, 有label可以幫一些病人(尤其係糖尿病患者)選擇合適的食物; 但是否所有皆是, 我看未必(因為亦related to supplier的成本----找人去label和分析有關nutrition)。

至於propose獲得豁免的少數食品(例如自稱low-fat的食物), 亦因此項法例而在香港消失。

>>法例生效之後,香港仲會唔會有腐乳賣?
去豆腐舖或者生產工場可能才有得賣, 我估。

好啦, 我講完咁長的話啦! 希望旗開得勝啦!

Karen (Sze) said...

又, 來自CK的特別新聞報導, 有個blog摺o左!

VC said...

"香港仲會唔會有腐乳賣?"

100.00%有.

火鶴 said...

買格仔餅, 係咪會有張label黐咗响餅面?

C.M. said...

Karen:

嘿,我估你睇左個故仔應該唔會發噩夢,但我會。

咁大隻字bold左,好驚。

提起食品標簽法,我又諗起呢班議員,呢排我對班立法會議員好有偏見!

VC:

Oops。係我衰左,下次我會醒定架勒。

阿鶴:

嗯,我都唔清楚。或者黐响包裝袋面卦。

Morca said...

1. 無事就好,又...個故仔好深...
2. 無事!你個頭仲喺度.
3. 遠行~我都好想...
4. 等下先.
5. 隻香水好正~
6. 死咗...喺地府炫耀吧.
7. 我極-極-極-極唔贊成標簽法,會去投票表達我不滿...(食開隻提子乾...ciao ciao)

xiao zhu said...

乜格仔餅有包裝紙嘅咩?

Samsara said...

Office politics....你知就最好啦,催稿催稿!

Geoffrey Kong 江貴為 said...

C.M.,唔駛驚無哂嘢食喎,銷售量三萬以下而無特別營養聲名嘅,唔駛標籤都仲有得賣。

標籤其實有時都有用,例如見過可樂糖份原來有10%之後,我係飲少咗好多!同埋買食用油時,我都會揀不飽和脂肪成份比較高嘅牌仔,無標籤又點有得揀!

C.M. said...

Morca:

1. 個故仔呢睇多兩眼你就明架勒
2. 你講野成日都腰心腰肺...
3. 唉,我就十年內都唔洗旨意遠行
4. 慢慢等
5. 名牌子有番咁上下
6. 嗯...
7. 投票,會唔會遲左呢?(我呢排好唔妥d佢地)

小珠:

無卦,我估會用袋囉。咦你... 梗係未食過勒

香妹:

Hehe...

江兄:

但係好似連“銷售量三萬以下”既貨品“無”獲得豁免播。

查實營養標簽係有用既,尤其對於已經有“好多選擇”既人黎講,不過我就唔覺得對於好似我呢亭無乜選擇既人有幾大幫助囉,隨時仲貴好多添。(你知香港貧富懸殊幾緊要架啦)

xiao zhu said...

咩呀,我好鍾意食格仔餅架、時時都買嚟食架!街邊嘢邊有包裝標籤架,講嘢呀你!

C.M. said...

唉呀,我地係咪講緊標簽法生效之後個情況呀...

微豆 Haricot said...

I am not sure if I understand. It's a nutrition/composition labelling law you are talking abt, right? If that's the case, then the issues are:
* Do the consumers have the "Right to Know"?
* What are the benefits vs cost vs risks?
* Is mandator labelling the best policy option to manage risks and to protect consumers?
* What are the external competitiveness drivers (e.g. WTO, overseas market shares, etc)?

Karen (Sze) said...

Dear 微豆 Haricot,
I tried to give answers for some of questions, maybe CM will be better to answer:

* Do the consumers have the "Right to Know"?
Yes (for the point of view from Government, concerned parties & consumers). However, one of the concern points is the Government will prohibit some of the food export to Hong Kong, such as A canned Orion Soup - if it was named as "Low Fat" without any nutrition labels.

* Is mandator labelling the best policy option to manage risks and to protect consumers?
For the view of Government, Yes.
But for consumer like CM & me, we don't think so.
To protect consumer, not only just placing the nutrition label but also random checking is essential (especially QA for food).

* What are the external competitiveness drivers (e.g. WTO, overseas market shares, etc)?
Throughtout the policy, it was only known that dietitians and Consumer Council drive the policy drafting (WTO or other parties, in this case was not mentioned from the Government).

Karen (Sze) said...

CM,

點呀? 無驚無險乎?

又, 我估在一些即食食品(如格仔餅)上, 頂多在包裝袋內貼上有成份和簡單的nutrition label, 細label細隻字呢種。

個人較喜歡雞蛋仔, 但少見, 好耐無食過, 甚念。

Karen (Sze) said...

唔好意思, 想提您----您未答我問題噃(之前提過您, 您話遲d答, 唔好借d衣閃好喎)!

C.M. said...

Haricot:

Yeah, that's the law we are talking about.

In my opinion...

1. "The Right to Know" always comes with a "Price". The more the right we "want", the higher the price we must pay for. I, feel very very uncomfortable stripping off others' ability to pay, just because I can afford to pay for that right.

2. B : C : R

Perhaps my microbiology background makes me more inclined to support genetic engineering (e.g. for GM food).

Benefit: There's trans-fat in junk food, and the tuna is GMed. Aren't they already too expensive for some of us? (Is that already a consensus?)

Cost: Uncertain. Scientists working hard on safe GM foods don't deserve their PhDs. They are just watchdogs of MNCs. Do they deserve this?

Risk: Too much fat is lethal in the long run, but does the poor have enough fat?

3. IMO, it is NOT entirely lame. But it's overdone.

4. Good question. I just can't see there are such drivers.

C.M. said...

Karen:

Thank you. 安然渡過,還花了錢。

雞蛋仔好似周街到係播,無理由見唔到。

你個問題我一定會回應,不過呢排真係忙到震,剛剛先有多d時間整理。

Haricot:

Umm... Sorry. I often over-react to those "political" views (and particularly by politicians) that might enforce so-called safety measures on the affordable at the expense of the unaffordable.

微豆 Haricot said...

Karen and CM: Thank you for the explanations/comments which are useful.