(a) 你認為資料A漫畫的主要信息是什麼？試參考資料A，解釋你的答案。 (3分)
L1 答案含混，未能有效運用資料作答。 [最多1分]
(b) 資料B作者對皇家香港警察持什麼態度？試參考資料B，解釋你的答案。 (4分)
(c) 「1967－1997年間，香港殖民地政府顯示了改善其管治的能力。」你是否同意此說？試參考資料A及B，並就你所知，解釋你的答案。 (8分)
L1 答案含混，未能有效使用資料和個人所知作答。 [最多2分]
L2 欠缺均衡，僅能有效運用資料或個人所知作答。 [最多4分]
L3 答案合理且均衡，能有效使用資料和個人所知作答。 [最多8分]
(a) What, in your opinion, was the main message of the cartoon in Source A? Explain your answer with reference to Source A. (3 marks)
Performance was good. This question required candidates to identify the main message of the cartoon in Source A and explain their answer with reference to Source A. Many candidates succeeded in answering the question as required. Some candidates misinterpreted the cartoon as one that primarily addressed hygiene problems of Hong Kong which had earned them no marks.
L1 Vague explanation and ineffective use of the Source. [max. 1]
L2 Clear answer with effective explanation with reference to the Source. [max. 3]
- The police were corrupt and could note maintain law and order.
- The policeman caught a person spitting but ignored the robbers around.
- The penalty of spitting in this case was unreasonably high.
The main message of the cartoon was that Hong Kong police were corrupted and irresponsible to their jobs.
First, Hong Kong police were corrupted.
From Source A, the man with the number tag “369” who represented Hong Kong policeman, caught a boy and claimed that “fine for spitting---$1000”, showing the police requested for penalty due to the improper behaviour of the boy. However, the normal penalty for spitting at the time “ranged from HK$15 to HK$100” only, reflecting the police requested for a penalty that was much higher than the one stated in law. This shows that Hong Kong police at that time abused their power for own interest.
Second, Hong Kong police impose upon those who are kind and powerless, but fear those who are severe.
From Source A, while the Hong Kong police was charging the boy who spitted, there were more serious crimes happened behind him like robbery, yet the police neglected it This implies that Hong Kong police were afraid of challenging the fierce gangster, and only suppressed the weak. Hence, they were irresponsible to their jobs.
(b) What was the attitude of the author of Source B towards the Royal Hong Kong Police? Explain your answer with reference to Source B. (4 marks)
Performance was fair. This question required candidates to identify the attitude of the author of Source B towards the Royal Hong Kong Police. According to Source B, the author had a mixed attitude to the Royal Hong Kong Police. Whereas most candidates succeeded in identifying part of this mixed attitude, only a minority of candidates presented all of it. Some candidates misread the Source, thinking that the author praised the Royal Hong Kong Police for upholding a stand of political neutrality. In fact, the ensuing lines clearly revealed that the author was not happy about this.
L1 Vague explanation and ineffective use of the Source, or presenting a one-sided answer. [max. 2]
L2 Clear answer with effective explanation with reference to the Source, and presenting a two-sided answer. [max. 4]
- Appreciative but suspicious
- Appreciative: the Royal Hong Kong Police were civilized and efficient.
- Suspicious: the author considered it problematic for the policemen not no concern politics.
The author of Source B showed appreciation towards the Royal Hong Kong Police.
First, the author appraised the Hong Kong police. From Source B, the author stated “the people of Hong Kong have to appreciate the work of its police force ”, this means that the general public satisfy with the performance of the Hong Kong police force. At the same time, the author even used words such as “civilised and friendly manner” to describe the Hong Kong police force. From these words, it reflected that they have a positive image and gained support from the public.
Second, Hong Kong police has high efficiency. From Source B, the Hong Kong police helped the author’s friend to find his “identity card” back within a short period of time. This reflected that the Hong Kong police have high working ability. Hence, the author is satisfied with the police force and appreciates them.
Third, Hong Kong Police were upright and uncorrupted. From Source B, after the identity card of the lawyer was found, “...the lawyer was so pleased that he offered the policeman 500 dollars as a sign of gratitude. His offer was gently declined.” This reflected Hong Kong Police were uncorrupted and served the public sincerely. Therefore, the author held a positive attitude towards the police.
At the same time, the author of Source B was disappointed and pessimistic towards the Royal Hong Kong Police.
Frist, Hong Kong police maintained neutrality against political issues. From Source B, the author mentioned “could not help but feel sad” about the “stand of political neutrality” upheld by the Hong Kong police that they “had become used to” the term “colony”, reflecting the author disagreed with the police keeping silence on political issue. This reflected Hong Kong Police were loyal to the regime, but lack of critical thinking. Hence, the author was disappointed.
Second, Hong Kong Police supported Hong Kong’s status as colony. From Source B, the author, a Mainland Chinese reporter, was patriotic. Under such circumstances, he was disappointed when Hong Kong Police were not bothered by the term “colony”, and even “become used to it.” Thus, the author stated “I could not help but feel sad about that.” This showed that Hong Kong Police were not patriotic and did not mind Hong Kong being colonized, which was contradictory to author’s stance. As a result, the author held a negative attitude.
(c) ‘The colonial government of Hong Kong demonstrated an ability to improve its governance in the period 1967－1997.’ Do you agree? Explain your answer with reference to Sources A and B and using your own knowledge. (8 marks)
Performance was fair. This question required candidates to discuss whether the colonial government of Hong Kong demonstrated an ability to improve its governance in the period 1967-1997. Some weak candidates did not compare the governance at different times in the period 1967-1997; rather, they merely mentioned the work the Hong Kong government did in the period. Only some able candidates showed the changes of governance of the Hong Kong government in the required period, with supporting evidence from both Sources and the candidates’ own knowledge.
L1 Vague answer, ineffective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 2]
L2 Lack in balance, effective in using either Sources or own knowledge only; [max. 4]
L3 Sound and balanced answer, effective in using both Sources and own knowledge. [max. 8]
- The Royal Hong Kong Police had been corrupt, but its work became recognized by people within and without Hong Kong by 1997. (Sources A and B)
- The colonial government carried out comprehensive social reforms and improved the living standard of Hong Kong as a whole. (own knowledge)
- The Hong Kong government could not effectively tackle the confidence crisis in the 1980s arising from the Hong Kong future question. (own knowledge)
- The Hong Kong government used to maintaining cordial working relationship with the PRC, but it failed to do so in the last decade of its colonial rule. (own knowledge)
Yes, I agree the colonial government of Hong Kong demonstrated an ability to improve its governance in the period 1967－1997.
Firstly, the colonial government was able to improve the problem of Hong Kong Police between 1967-1997.
In 1974, Hong Kong Police were ineffective in performing duties. According to Source A, the policeman only charged the boy for spitting but neglected the gangster who robbed innocent citizens. Reflecting Hong Kong Police failed to treat every citizen equally and fairly, and gave in under power (?). Hence, Hong Kong Police were ineffective in maintaining a stable and safe society in 1974.
However, in 1997, the efficiency of Hong Kong Police improved greatly. According to Source B, the author complimented Hong Kong Police for being efficient and effective. “A lawyer who came from the mainland to work in Hong Kong told me that he once reported the loss of his identity card to a policeman nearby. Before he arrived at his office, he had already received a call from the same policeman, informing him that his card had been found.” This reflected Hong Kong Police had a good performance, unlike their useless performance in 1974.
Hong Kong Police were corrupted in 1974. According to Source A, the policeman fined the boy $1000 for spitting, yet the penalty for spitting at the time normally ranged from HK$15 to HK$100. Moreover, the policeman attempted to use violence as he held a baton while the boy did not hold any dangerous weapons. This reflected abuse of authority was common in the police force, which was also a violation of law. Hence, Hong Kong Police were corrupted in 1974.
However, in 1997, Hong Kong Police were upright and uncorrupted. According to Source B, a lawyer lost his identity card in Hong Kong, fortunately, a policeman found it and “Upon picking up his card, the lawyer was so pleased that he offered the policeman 500 dollars as a sign of gratitude.” Yet, accepting that 500 dollars was illegal since it was corruption, so “His offer was gently declined.” Showing that police in 1997 were upright and the problem of corruption was significantly ameliorated. Therefore, the colonial government demonstrated an ability to improve its governance, by solving the problem of police, in the period 1967－1997.
Secondly, the Hong Kong government improved social problem between 1967-1997.
The housing problem was deplorable in 1967. According to my own knowledge, the Hong Kong government did nothing when people return after WW2. With limited money, they were forced to live in squatter shacks, which were obsolete. For instance, the Shek Kit Mei squatter area fire in 1953 directly reflected the inability of the colonial government.
The housing problems were nearly solved and much improved by 1997. According to my own knowledge, governor Maclehose introduced the Ten-year housing policy in 1972 and the Home ownership scheme in 1978. The former one benefited 180 thousand Hong Kong citizens with a decent living conditions. While the latter one sold houses to people in a discounted price. This shows that the Hong Kong government was capable in ruling.
Thirdly, the Hong Kong government strengthen communication with citizens in the year 1967 to 1997.
In 1967, the Hong Kong government ignore the Hong Kong people. According to my own knowledge, the government adopted non-intervention policy in response to Chinese affairs. At the same time, there were only a few Chinese unofficial members (Tsui Kai Cheung) in the two councils. The lack of communications eventually led to the 1967 riots.
Later till 1997, the Hong Kong government actively communicate with Chinese by strengthening consultation and local administration. According to my own knowledge, the government set up district council in 1982 to deal with local affairs. Also, it appointed Anson Chan and Donald Tsang in 1992 and 1995 as the administrative and financial secretary. This shows that the Hong Kong government listen the opinions of Chinese, and so the representativeness of the government increased. Hence, with the ability to ease the insufficient communication problem with the citizens, the colonial government shows improved governance.