盧寵茂在7月28日的港大校委會議突倒下，手抱右膝卧地，事後指陳文敏沒有慰問他。資料圖片
【大 學爭自主】【本報訊】香港大學校委會議再有錄音曝光。台灣網站昨流傳疑似港大三名校委的錄音，其中身兼外科學系系主任的盧寵茂質疑，法律學院前院長陳文敏 的學術水平「唔夠班」，又炮轟陳在盧跌倒後沒致以慰問。他又抱怨在學生衝擊事件中遭誣衊「插水」；還自稱加入校委會後所受痛苦比陳更甚。記者：白琳
香港大學發言人表示，由於涉及該會議錄音的禁制令聆訊仍在進行，不宜作回應。本報先後向兩名知情者求證錄音真偽，兩人均證實此為9月29日港大校委會會議錄音。
指陳沒博士學位難任副校
台灣網上討論區PTT本月8日曾經發佈疑似校委王䓪鳴的會議錄音，昨晚7時許又再「爆料」，出現題為《[爆卦]夢到港大黑幕》貼文，附上音檔及譯文。發言者的聲線與上述校委脗合。
該段錄音長約20分鐘，身兼全國政協委員的黃景強、港區全國人大代表廖長江、盧寵茂先後闡述反對陳文敏任副校的論點。
盧 寵茂在會議上質疑，陳在過去15年出產少於五篇學術文章，「若果我的助理教授的履歷只有每年一篇文獻，我會說，你惹麻煩了」。他又質疑陳沒博士學位，不能 勝任負責學術及人事的副校職位。他又質疑馬斐森作為物色委員會主席的判斷，「你並沒留意這點並覺得這是理所當然，因他是教授和院長，一定夠資格。這個假設 並不正確。」
盧寵茂雖認為大學職員有政治取向並無不妥，但對陳的處理手法感震驚，「我看不到陳文敏對任何校委致以慰問。以我本人為例，我是員工選出的校委……我不是說我需要他慰問，但作為掌管學術及人事的副校，若有同事在這種場合受傷，你應否不斷強調這是校委會的錯，即是我也錯了？」
馬斐森稱盧摻雜個人考慮
盧 寵茂進一步炮轟陳文敏「把政治取向帶進港大」，「由於政見不同，他可能認為我在此是代表梁振英」。盧澄清自己並非「梁粉」，奈何遭陳等人標籤，就像「受了 甚麼苦都是我『抵死』」。盧又指，雖然陳遭受攻擊，但他本人所受的痛苦比陳更甚，「我被指控是演員、『插水』。我很難過……」
在該會議上，港大校長馬斐森反擊，直言盧對陳的批評摻雜很多個人考慮，希望討論回歸事實和招聘目的，又指招聘條件沒規定出產學術文章須達某個數量，更無「要求申請人對任何傷者致以慰問」。
馬斐森強調，物色委員會有四名學者，包括他本人，判斷學術資歷的經驗豐富，他們認為陳的學術資歷合適，「可能有校委不同意，但我不會重新審視物色委員會的決定」。
馬斐森又指出，盧不應把醫學的學術要求轉移至法律，因為兩者不盡相同。馬又促請校委會通過委員會的推薦，「即使所有結果（接受、否決或押後任命）都不太吸引，對我來說，接受物色委員會的推薦將對港大造成較少傷害」。
港大校友關注組召集人葉建源認為馬是據理力爭，醫學教授的文獻產量不能與其他學科比較，「以盧寵茂出嘅篇數，如果放入文學院多到不得了」，「聽到呢啲錄音後，疑問就越嚟越大。佢哋唔願意開誠布公，其實係因為根本唔能夠公開交代到」。
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151126/19388386
防擅用資源 院長不應做研究
陳文敏曾任港大法律學院院長12年。
【本報訊】盧寵茂批評陳文敏學術水平不足，論文發表又少。港大教師及職員會主席張星煒指，陳任法律學院院長12年，近10年該席位已改公開招聘，並只做行政工作，不應期望院長做學術研究，防止院長將資源納為己用。
陳 文敏於1982年在港取得大律師資格，他曾稱因想從事一份以人為本工作及可進行研究工作，所以加入港大任教，至今已30年。他的專長於研究人權、憲制及行 政法。陳於2003年5月10日獲時任終審法院首席法官李國能，委任為名譽身份的資深大律師，是自1997年至今唯一獲得該殊榮的資深大律師。他由 2002年至2014年擔任法律學院院長，是任期最長院長，院方在10月初曾發表聲明支持陳，稱「我們曾有幸得他掌舵」。
有著名法律學者僅為學士
在法律學界，博士學位並非必要，因此有世界著名法律學者只有學士學位，但校委李國章卻以此反對他任副校，盧則指他在過去15年發表的著作一年不足五次，甚至有些年份只有一次。
張 星煒指出，10年前院長是學院教授互選出來，類近兼任形式，院長仍需教學及做研究，但校方之後改制，院長之位公開招聘，只屬行政職位，「院長有權控制資 源，係唔應該做研究，否則會有衝突，如果將資源幫自己做研究，對師生不公平」。因此近10年的院長，都是擅於管理而獲聘任。
■記者倪清江
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151126/19388420
黃景強反陳任命「港大分裂太嚴重」
廖長江：文章在Google只被搜尋4次
港大校委黃景強（左）及廖長江在會上發言外洩。
【大學爭自主】
【本 報訊】昨晚網上流傳的疑似港大校委會議錄音，包括以往甚少就港大事務發言的校委黃景強及廖長江。黃反對法律學院前院長陳文敏任副校的說法，與另一校委王䓪 鳴口徑一致，強調陳文敏充滿爭議、港大「分裂得太嚴重」，更指人事任命與學術自由無關。廖長江則以陳的文章在Google只被搜尋過4次作為否決任命的理 由。本報昨未能聯絡黃景強，廖長江則未有回覆。
記者：白 琳
港 大校委會於9.29會議以12比8票否決副校任命，屬於少數投贊成的理學院院長郭新曾向學生表明拖延副校任命實屬不幸，並承諾堅守學術自由。根據疑似會議 錄音內容，黃景強首先指郭教授言之成理，又指所有校委均尊重學術自由，「我們討論的是人事招聘事宜。我們委任一個人與否，與學術自由無關」。
黃景強續指，港大必須團結，確保大學享有學術自由、學術成就與和諧人際關係（smooth human relation），「我們已分裂得太嚴重，主席、校長和高級管理層必須團結一心」。雖然他希望盡快物色人選，但目前他並不支持物色委員會推薦陳文敏出任副校。
港大學生會會長馮敬恩早前披露，校委廖長江曾於會議上引用Google scholar搜尋結果。疑似廖長江在該段錄音稱，曾就學術水平議題向港大及其他院校的資深學者查詢，答案都是大同小異。
疑似廖長江本人曾查閱過去5年的學術文獻，也曾在「Google research」尋找陳文敏的學術文章被引用情況，聲稱結果陳的文章僅被搜尋過4次，而且並無任何引用。
學者：行外人乜都唔識
學術自由學者聯盟成員黃偉國反駁，大學的學術自由並非只着眼於研究題目，精粹在於院校在處理人事任命等校政上必須有民主、問責及透明的制度，質疑黃稱任命與學術自由無關的說法荒謬，也是對學術自由的侮辱。
黃偉國續表示，不同學術領域有不同的論文資料庫，根本不會用Google作衡量學術論文影響力的工具，「用google嚟search同小學雞冇分別。行外人乜嘢都唔識，就用google冇資料嚟話人，係唔尊重人同無知嘅表現」。
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151126/19388425
港大校友投票
促向李國章說不
港大畢業生議會將於下周日（29日）再舉行特別會員大會，召集人葉建源促校友當天出席向李說不。
【本 報訊】盛傳特首梁振英鐵定委任「梁粉」李國章接掌港大校委會，港大畢業生議會將於下周日（29日）再舉行特別會員大會，就是否接受李國章進行投票。提出舉 行大會的港大校友關注組今次收到的授權票只有1,000多張，比9月大會時5,000多張大減，召集人葉建源促校友當天出席向李說不。
暫有千張授權票
大會將於周日上午11時在港大許磐卿講堂舉行，會上將就關注組成員吳錦祥、歐耀佳及葉建源提出的4組共5個動議進行表決。議案一是強烈譴責校委會在9月29日否決陳文敏任命，以及校委會必須在動議通過後14日內向公眾解釋否決理據及何謂基於「港大最大長遠利益」。
另一動議是認同洩漏當日部份委員在會上言論符合公眾利益和港大的舉報政策。葉建源提出不信任前校委會主席梁鴻智及12名反對陳文敏的校委；以及提出李國章不適合接任主席，原因是他不具備學術和非學術人員的信任、信心和尊重。
畢 業生議會在9月1日舉行歷來最大規模的特別會員大會，有3,000多人出席，另5,000多人預先提交了授權書。今次校友提交授權書需有身份證副本作核 實，葉建源昨表示，今次收到的授權書「少好多」，只有1,000多張。促校友出席投票以推高支持率；如明日《憲報》刊登梁振英委任李國章做主席，「校友更 加要去表達意見！」
■記者倪清江
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151126/19388433
吳克儉避談校委會主席人選
吳克儉昨日在立法會回應質詢時舊調重彈，指政府委任何公職，也是用人唯才。
【本 報訊】港大校委會主席一職月初懸空至今，政府尚未公佈任命，教育局局長吳克儉昨指回應何時公佈主席人選時，只稱適當時間公佈，又稱委任原則是用人唯才，但 工黨李卓人批評特首梁振英「用人唯奴才」，一旦委任被謔稱「教育沙皇」的李國章，違反國家主席習近平要求政府促進和諧的指令。
只稱政府用人唯才
吳克儉昨日在立法會回應質詢時舊調重彈，指政府委任何公職，也是用人唯才；至於何時公佈港大校委會主席人選，他只稱當政府有任命決定時，會在適當時間公佈。
提出此質詢的公民黨立法會議員郭家麒批評吳克儉所指的「用人唯才」是「擘大眼講大話」，認為梁振英欲由李國章擔任主席，是安插梁粉在港大，若非是政治任務，便是政治酬庸、赤化港大。
郭家麒指「李國章係聲名狼藉、教育沙皇，做教育局長時已經不斷殘害院校自主，如果獲委任人士都唔受學生同公眾支持，政府係咪應該繼續委任佢？」
人民力量陳志全質疑教育局只識譴責公開校委會錄音的行為，不譴責《文匯報》公開港大物色委員會建議的副校長人選，是雙重標準。
吳克儉回應指，兩事不應混為一談，指公開偷錄事態嚴重，故此教育局要回應。
■記者姚國雄
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151126/19388370
疑似港大9.29校委會會議錄音全文
港大校委於9月29日召開會議，會後主席梁智鴻聯同校長馬斐森宣佈否決陳文敏的副校任命。
黃景強發言
黃 景強：Thank you chairman. I think Professor Kwok has a point but I think academic freedom, I think here is the Council meeting on this particular issue is not the main point of concern because we are talking about is the recruitment of human resources matter. Whether or not we are appointing a person does not relate to academic freedom. I think we all respect academic freedom very well and as our President said in the opening and remarks, right now we are really in a dilemma: approve it, disapprove it or delay it, every single option will have a down side. I think we have to make a choice.
（多謝主席。我認為郭（新）教授言之成理， 但學術自由並非是次會議重點，我們討論的是人事招聘事宜。我們委任一個人與否，與學術自由無關。所有與會者都非常尊重學術自由。正如主席開首的發言，我們 正在處於兩難--無論通過、否決還是押後（副校任命），每個選擇都有缺點。我們必須抉擇。）
After reading the papers, which is the first time I have ever heard of this paper then I officially looked at the name of the candidate, although I have heard about the name in the press for a long time. I do feel that we have to be very cautious in this appointment because, as some of our colleagues mentioned earlier, we have to really unite, I am talking about HKU only, not Hong Kong. We have to unite, trying to develop a strategy under the instruction of president to really foster and assure academic freedom, academic excellence and also smooth human relation. I think we have been divided too much. We really need somebody to hold us together. Our chairman, our president and all our senior management team.
（我是首次聽說有這份報告，讀過才知道申請人的名字，不過我早就從報章聽聞他的名字。我們必須審慎處理此任命，因正如部份同事 所言，我們必須團結，我指港大，不是整個香港。我們必須團結，嘗試在校長帶領下發展策略，確保大學享有學術自由，學術成就與和諧人際關係。我們已分裂得太 嚴重，主席、校長和高級管理層必須團結一心。）
So, on balance, without referring to any particular issues, I really see controversy surrounding the candidate. So may be it is more cautious step to appoint a person in this post as soon as possible but I will not support the nomination at this point.
（我在沒提及特定議題的情況下權衡，申請人確實充滿爭議。儘管慎重起見必須盡快就此職位委任人選，但我目前不會支持此項（物色委員會的）推薦。）
廖長江發言
廖 長江：I have made some enquires amongst the senior academics open in this University and other Universities, it is more or less the same thing. I dare to look into the publications in the past5 years myself, and also nothing as detailed and as comprehensive as Edward's research. Perhaps just to supplement on what Edward said, I have looked into the past5 years, and I was looking for citation of academic work from the candidate, and there was none, except there was googled4 times, googled…research…I mean it was google researched…it was google searched4 times, and there was no citation. Thank you.
（我曾向港大及其他院 校資深學者查詢，答案都是大同小異。我甚至查閱過去5年的學術文獻，也不及Edward（陳坤耀）的調查仔細和全面。我只就Edward的意見補充，我曾 經尋找申請人的學術文章被引用情況，其文章在google被搜尋過四次……google……研究，我是指google研究……搜尋過4次，我找不到任何引 用記錄。多謝。）
盧寵茂發言
港大校委、外科學系主任盧寵茂前日到沙宣道開會，一如以往急駛至停車場，再直接上地面會議室。朱永倫攝
盧 寵茂：My position in the Council is somewhat similar to KY. We are both academic staff elected by staff members. I fully understand that we are here as our personal capacity. I am not representing the staff but I do have the perspective from the staff members. So in terms of the academic qualifications, for example, I can make some comments and in terms of how I see him as a potential candidate for PVC staffing, remember this is related to academic staffing and resources. So that's why I do feel that I can give my opinion and thoughts about the appointment. Firstly it is on academic achievement. Secondly, as a staff, whether I see him as a suitable person to take care of staffing and resources because there have very important implications for us, for the staff.
（我在校委會的角色與KY（袁國勇）相近。我們都是同事選出的教職員。我完全明白，雖然我是以個人身份加入 校委會，並不代表同事，但我會從同事的角度出發。從學術資格而言，我可就負責學術及人事的副校人選任命給點意見。首先是申請人的學術成就，然後是我作為港 大職員認為他是否適合負責人事及資源，因這對我們及同事意義重大。）
I am a new member of the Council and I was elected in May, so I have been in the Council this is the forth one. When I decided to accept the nomination, I really don't have this item on my agenda, maybe I am a bit regret now. As if you look at the attack against Johannes Chan, I would say that my suffer in the last couple of months is a result in the participation in this Council, is perhaps even more than what he has suffered. He has the right to complain about, I don't know what I should do. I was fulfilling my duty as a University staff elected representative to take part in this Council meeting, and every time I remind myself this is my duty to do it for the best interest of the University.
（我是校委會的新成 員，在5月當選，這是我的第4次會議。我接受提名時，真的不知道這（副校任命）在議程內，我現在可能有點後悔（背景聲音：與會者哄笑）。當你看見陳文敏受 到攻擊，我過去數月來因加入校委會而所受的痛苦比陳文敏更甚。他有權投訴，我卻不知道能夠做甚麼。我履行獲選委員的職責去參加校委會議，每次都提醒自己必 須從港大最佳利益出發。）
But when I fell, all these people...I am not saying only the students, I know there are people outside the University, there is no doubt that the student lead the crowd in when I have this meeting. I was accused in so many media, so many articles, pictures to say that I am an actor,插水, alright. I really feel very bad, I didn't complain eventually and even when I was in the hospital, and I talked to the media with my occupation in charge that I will kindly accept,我唔追究啲學生. That's my true belief because I feel very sad if those people in the room and outside were our students, I really feel ashamed. We have not done our duty well.
（然而當我跌倒，這些人……不只是學生，還有校外人 士，牽頭闖進來的無疑是學生。在很多傳媒文章和相片，我被指控是演員、插水。我很難過，卻依然沒投訴，在醫院對傳媒也說我會接受：「我唔追究啲學生」。這 是我的信念，我難過的是，若果會議聽內外的是我們的學生，我會覺得羞愧，因我們沒盡責（教好學生）。）
I always remind myself that what I read in the newspaper cannot be taken as the truth and I always say and tell other people that I don't know the candidate until I saw it on the table in this meeting. I was asked, before this meeting, in the last honorary fellowship conference. All these media came to me asking, would you accept this Johannes Chan be received as the next PVC and I said come on, how can you ask me to make a conclusion before I actually conducted a study as an academic, we should not make conclusion before we looked at the facts. The facts are here and the facts are also from all the discussions we had. I really appreciated all the members and I truly believe everyone here is an independent trustee of the University, hoping for the best interest of the University. I appreciate all the thoughts and I am now saying what I think base on all these facts, what is my opinion.
（我經常提醒自己，報紙寫 的不能當真。我並不知道誰是申請人，直至在校委會會議看到文件。較早前我出席榮譽院士會議時，所有傳媒都問我是否接受陳文敏任副校。我說，拜託，我作為一 個學者，豈能在研究前下結論？我們不應在弄清事實前就下結論。從各委員的討論，事實擺在眼前，我很感激所有委員，我真心相信這裏每個人都是港大的獨立信託 人，為港大最佳利益着想。我將會就這些事實給予意見。）
Now, first of all I have to declare my conflict of interest, I know Johannes Chan. He was in the same hostel with me in St. Johns College so we lived next to another floor. We know each other and in some of the previous University activities he has expressed support for me and for my department. So I really appreciate his support for me. In fact when I heard about his nomination in the media, that he is the candidate...And in the personal point of view that he is a good guy as many of the members have said. He is a good man. He has been working for the University for so long. This is the first impression for me that I should support him. But after looking at this and especially after the incident in July, I have some reservation. It is about his qualification. Professor Chen has a very detailed analysis on the publication. You can look at it, for the last15 years, he has produced less than5 items output including factor and article, less than5 a year and in some years for example, in2008, he has produced only1 item,2011,1 item only.
（首先，我必須申報利益。我認識陳文敏，我 倆（讀港大時）曾同住聖約翰學院（宿舍）。在港大以往的活動他曾支持我和我的學系，我很感激他的支持。事實上當我從傳媒聽說他獲提名為副校長候選人的時 候……正如許多校委所言，我個人認為他是一個好人。他在港大工作多年。我第一個念頭是，我應該支持他。然而當我仔細考量，尤其是7月事件（學生衝擊校委會 議）發生後，我有些保留。關於其資格，陳（坤耀）教授就其學術文章作過詳細分析。過去15年，他出產少於5篇學術文獻，每年少於5篇，他分別於2008年 和2011年各出產一篇文章而已。）
I know the number, quantity, is not the absolute measure, you have to see the quality as well. If I have an assistant professor with this kind of output, I will be very concerned, I would really say, hey, how can you reach the bar of the notion within the University, very strict criteria4+4 for practical,3+3 for non-practical, for promotion either up or out from an assistant professor to an associate professor. If my assistant professor give me a CV of1 output per year, I would say, you are in trouble. In6 years or in8 years time, how many publications did you have in your CV? You can't reach that bar.
（我明白產量並非絕對標準，也視乎質素。若然我屬下的助理教授只有這樣的產量，我會非常憂慮。我會說，你怎能符合港大4+4和3+3晉升為副教授的嚴謹要求？若果我的助理教授的履歷只有每年1篇文獻，我會說，你惹麻煩了，在6至8年內你會有多少篇文獻？你並不符合標準。）
馬斐森及盧寵茂發言
盧 寵茂：I agree with KY that the University, the USPC, he is not a case to promotion and I doubt whether the same applies to the Law faculty. I believe it should, you still have the same sort of criteria. Professor Chen is actually the best person here as an academic. So I would like to start a question whether he has the academic qualifications to take up this position especially he will be looking at staffing, looking at promotion and if you are not a PhD yourself how can you supervise people. The same as if you are not academically of certain standing. How can you say, hey, you are not well presented. The candidate would really say, look at your CV, your CV is not as good as mine. How can you turn down an application, if you don't have the kind of quality? So this is my feeling when I saw this CV and reminded me of quality and whether he is qualified as a PVC. Perhaps the VC may not be aware of this but certainly I think after this point was mentioned, I hope as the Search Committee chairman, you would consider whether, you know, you said just now you were not aware of this and you take it for granted since he has been promoted to a professor and since he is appointed as a dean, he must qualify. I don't feel that assumption is correct.
（我贊成袁國勇所指，對大學或USPC（University Selection Promotion Committee，大學遴選及晉升委員會）而言，他並非晉升材料，我也懷疑這要求是否適用於法律學院。我相信始終要有相類要求，而陳（坤耀）教授是這裏 最優秀的學者。故此我提出質疑，究竟申請人有否學術資格勝任此職以處理人事及晉升？如果你並非博士，如何擔任監督的工作？若你的學術成就不足，怎去否定別 人的履歷？對方會反駁指你的資歷並不及我。這是我對申請人履歷的觀感，提醒我究竟他是否勝任副校。也許（馬斐森）校長並沒留意這點，但我希望提出這項質疑 之後，物色委員會主席（即校長）會加以考慮。你剛才表示，你並沒留意這點並覺得這是理所當然，因他是教授和院長，所以一定夠資格。這個假設並不正確。）
馬 斐森：There were4 academic members on the Search Committee. I was qualified to make academic judgments, I have a lot of experience of making these judgments. There were3 other academic members of the committee, so there were4 people,3 of them are not here to represent their views, so my job as a chairman is to represent their views. Academic credentials were considered, and were considered suitable. Council members may disagree. But I am not going to go back from the judgment made by the Search Committee.（物色委員會有4名學者（包括馬斐森）。我有資格作學術判斷，而且經驗豐富。另外3人現不在席，我作為委員會主席有責任代為表達。我 們曾經考慮申請人的學術資歷，認為合適。可能有校委不同意，但我不會重新審視物色委員會的決定。）
As to a comment to the number of papers he published, I think it's utterly irrelevant. There's no job description that says you could have published certain number of papers or you're not qualified for this role. The absolute number of papers published are not...quality and you can't transfer from medicine into law because the publication requirements are different. So frankly the number of paper he published in the last15 years I think is irrelevant.
（至於對文獻產量的意見，我認為完全不相關。招聘條件並無指明你必須出產一定數量的文章否則就不合資格。文獻數量並不……（等如）質素。你也不能把醫學的學術要求轉移至法律，因兩者出產文獻的要求不同。老實說，我認為過去15年他的文獻數量並不相關。）
盧 寵茂：Well that's the qualification part...my feeling about reading his CV...the second part is related to whether he's suitable for this position, because he's going to take care of academic staffing. And my expectation for such person has to be very impartial. I wouldn't have problem with political approval, alright? You apply to your political meeting or whatever. I do have many staffs who take part in Occupy Central. They are so yellow, and I've expressed my position and my opinion that I did not support Occupy Central. I don't have a problem in the hospital, because they work in hospital, political opinion does not affected their clinical service and never change their duty just because they support Occupy Central. That should not affect your work within the University and the hospital.
（那是關於資格的部份和我對其履歷的觀感。第二部份關 於他是否適合出任此職。他將會處理學術人事，我期望這人必須公正不阿。我不會對政治認同有意見，你可參加任何政治聚會。我有很多同事參與佔中，他們很 「黃」。我也曾明言我不支持佔中。但醫院工作沒出問題，政治意見並不影響同事的臨床服務，其職責沒因佔中而改變，大學和醫院工作不應受影響。）
But on that event, on that night we have been in the storm of Council meeting and subsequently my injury. And after the event, I didn't really see him showing any sympathy for the Council members, and in particular, I use myself as an example. I am a staff elected by all the other staff to take part. And I sustained and injured. From all the opinion that he has expressed, actually he's still putting the blame on the Council, he has never...I'm not saying I need his sympathy. But as a staff, I really feel if you are PVC(staffing) and if a staff member had an injury during an event like this, should you just keep on saying it's the Council's fault, that means it's my fault as well? So in a way he's telling the public, he's speaking out in public, including his《香港家書》, that the fault remains in the Council...the suffering I encountered. That is my reserve.
（然而，在校委會會議掀起風暴那一夜我受了傷，此後我看不到陳文敏對 任何校委致以慰問。以我本人為例，我是員工選出的校委，我緊守崗位並受傷，但他對外發表意見，只是怪責校委。我不是說我需要他慰問，但作為掌管學術及人事 的副校，若有同事在這種場合受傷，你應否不斷強調這是校委會的錯，即是我也錯了？他在（電台節目）《香港家書》等公開言論均指錯在校委會……我所受的苦。 這是我有保留的原因。）
As I said before, I came to this meeting when I know he's a potential candidate. I am very supportive initially. For this and now looking his CV and what happened, his way of handling it...it certainly rings a bell for me that I really need to think twice before considering him as a suitable person for this position. And I wonder, I know the recommendation by the Search Committee was actually made a while ago...was written in July. With that kind of incidents and the way that this candidate has expressed his opinion in public, would the Search Committee still consider that kind of person is suitable to handle academic staffing and resources? Because as a staff, I am seriously concerned, even though I know I am here not representing the staff.
（正如我剛才所指，我出席校委會議才知道陳文敏是申請人。我最初很支持，但因前述事件，再看他的履歷和發生過的事，還有他處 理的手法……提醒我必須再三考慮他是合適人選。我知道物色委員會很久以前……在7月作出推薦。因應連串事件及申請人公開表達的意見，請問物色委員會是否仍 然認為這種人適合處理學術人事及資源？我作為員工感到非常憂慮，儘管我並不代表所有同事。）
梁智鴻: The recommendation of Search Committee was made in July(...) sorry in May. So anything after that was not included.
（物色委員會在7月……抱歉，是5月作出推薦，因此並不包括所有以後發生的事情。）
盧 寵茂：That is a case. Can I ask the chairman of the Search Committee, would you take into account of what happened afterwards, that this candidate has done this?（VC：Done what?）Openly breached the confidentiality calling himself a candidate, and then was complaining that the Council is not doing the right thing. And despite the fact that there are Council members including the staff member who suffered injury during that event, he has expressed no concern whatsoever with the safety of the Council and staff members.
（請問物色委員會主席，你會否把之後發生的事件納入考慮，包括申請人做過的事？（馬斐森：做過甚麼事？）公然違反保密條款承認自己是申請人，並且投訴校委做錯。有校委兼大學職員在上述事件受傷，他都沒有對校委及職員安全表達關注。）
And in contrast, he put the blame into the Council members and including me as a staff member. I am really terrified that someone with this kind of... I don't want to extrapolate but I felt if someone... I would say he's putting his political inclination into the University. Because of the difference in political opinions, he may think that I am here to represent CY. I can tell you I am not a梁粉. I came in with support of the staff members, I've never talked to CY. CY has never talked to me about this, but it seems that everybody there including Johannes Chan has labeled me as a梁粉...and whatever I did, whatever I suffered, I deserved it.
（反之，他責怪校委，包括我作為職員。我感到震驚，我不想揣測但我感到……我會說他把政治取向帶進港大。由於政 見不同，他可能認為我在此是代表梁振英，我可以對你說，我不是梁粉。我是基於同事的支持加入校委，我沒與梁振英說過話，梁振英也從對我談及此事。似乎所有 人包括陳文敏已經標籤我做梁粉……無論我做過甚麼，受了甚麼苦，都是我抵死。）
馬斐森：So my comment on that is I think you've taken things very personally, and I think we should keep things to factual discussion, and the purpose of the candidate. There's no requirement in the job description for the candidate to express sympathy otherwise for anybody who is injured. I think you are putting post-event facts into this particular context, so the… I can't speak for the Search Committee, Search Committee hasn't met since27 May, I can only speak as a Council Member, the events that happened since the Search Committee's paper was written on27 May, there have been many things written and said, a lot of opinions, I prefer to stick to the facts. And the facts that the Committee has to consider were the qualification and suitability for the post. I've already said at the start of the meeting that it's my view that whilst none of the outcomes are attractive, to my mind, there will be less damage done for the University by the acceptance of the nomination and become a......projection.
（我認為你摻雜很多個人考慮。我們的討論應基於事實和招聘目的。招聘條件並無要求申請人對任何傷者 致以慰問。你把做完決定之後發生的事都考慮在內。我不能代表物色委員會發言，他們在5月27日之後未曾碰面。我只能以校委身份發言，那天之後發生了很多事 情，有很多人寫了很多東西，有很多意見，我寧可聚焦在事實之上。事實是物色委員會已考慮此職位的資格和合適與否。我在會議開首已指出，即使所有結果（接 受、否決或押後任命）都不太吸引，對我來說，接受物色委員會的推薦將對港大做成較少傷害。）
資料來源：台灣PTT網上討論區
https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1448451969.A.C8B.html
沒有留言:
張貼留言