Hong Sir Regular Plan B

公私營醫療失衡﹕病人湧入公立醫院 Imbalance between public and private

health services: influx of patients into public hospitals
(1) 良好醫療服務素質﹕世界一流醫療技術﹐瑪麗醫院肝臟移植手術﹔癌症電療
及化療﹐專業服務 Good medical services: world-class medical technology, liver
transplant at the Queen Mary Hospital; radiotherapy and chemotherapy for
cancer, professional services
(2) 低廉服務收費﹕2013 年﹐政府用於醫療範疇的財政達 537 億﹔香港居民可享
用受資助醫療服務﹕急症收費$100﹐住院每晚$68﹐豁免制度 Low service
charges: In 2013, the government spent $53.7 billion on health services. Hong
Kong residents can enjoy medical services subsidized by the government:
Accident & Emergency: $100 per attendance, In-patient: $68 per day, waiving
mechanism
(3) 醫療保險購買率低﹕全港只有 34%市民購買醫療保險﹐比例低﹔無力支付高
昂的私家醫院費用﹐例如化療每次$12000Few people buy medical insurance:
Only 34% of Hong Kong people have bought medical insurance, which accounts
for a small proportion. Cannot afford the charges of private hospitals, e.g.
$12,000 for each chemotherapy
(4) 嚴重貧富懸殊問題﹕2012 年堅尼系數是 0.537﹐結構性失業﹐131 萬貧窮人口﹐
佔全體市民 20%Serious problem of disparity between the rich and the poor:
the Gini coefficient is 0.537 in 2012; structural unemployment; 1.31 million
people living under the poverty threshold, accounting for 20% of the total
population
(5) 公立醫院覆蓋率高﹕全港有 41 間公立醫院﹐只有 14 間私家醫院﹔較短交通
距離﹐地點便利﹐因此吸引市民前往就醫 High coverage of public hospitals:
There are 41 public hospitals but only 14 private hospitals in Hong Kong. Short
transportation distances and convenient locations attract people to seek
medical advice

政府應否監管醫學美容行業﹖ 規管不等於禁止 Should the government

supervise (regulate) the aesthetic medical industry?
Supervise (regulate) does not mean prohibit
支持論點 Supporting arguments:﹕(1)防止醫療事故再發生﹐保障市民利益(健康)

1
Prevent future medical accidents and protect public interests (health)﹔(2)減少政
府醫療開支/負擔(醫治病人) Reduce the government’s medical expenses / burden
(to treat the patient)﹔(3)促進醫療產業發展(改善聲譽/素質保證) Promote the
development of medical services (Improve the reputation / Ensure the quality)﹔(4)
提高政府支持度(政府保障市民利益) Get more support for the government (the
government protects public interests)

反對論點 Opposing arguments﹕

(1)業界蒙受損失(結業/投資損失)。反駁﹕利大於弊﹐犧牲少數公司利益﹐保障
全港市民利益﹐整體社會得益 (因禽流感而停止活雞銷售是其中一個例子)。補
償措施﹕一次性補償 (例如政府也對交回活家禽零售牌照的人士進行賠償) The
industry suffers loss (shut down / investment loss). Rebuttal: more pros than cons.
Sacrificing the interests of few companies to protect public interests will benefit the
society as a whole (e.g. prohibiting live poultry sale due to avian influenza).
Compensation measures: disposable compensation (e.g. the government made
compensation for the people who surrendered their live poultry retail licenses)
(2)失業率惡化(沒有專業資格的從業員失業)﹔反駁﹕政府可為失業者提供培訓
課程﹔對專業醫護人員的需求增加﹐沒有職位流失 Worsening unemployment
(workers with no professional qualifications are unemployed). Rebuttal: the
government can provide training courses to the unemployed; increased demand for
health care providers, there is no losses of jobs
(3)政府干預自由市場﹐損投資吸引力。反駁﹕經濟自由不等於完全不干預﹔政
府有責任制定規則令市場有效運作。(政府制定 電訊條例﹐將合謀定價列為非法
行為﹐保障消費者利益) The government intervenes in the free market, harming
the investment attractiveness. Rebuttal: Free economy does not mean
non-intervention. The government has the responsibility to institute rules to
ensure effective market operations. (The government made the
Telecommunications Ordinance. Price collusion is regarded as an illegal act so as to
protect consumers’ interests.)

2
 Hong Sir Regular Plan B

公共衛生 Public health﹕

(1) 疾病威脅(健康風險)﹕傳染病(愛滋病/沙士/禽流感)﹐慢性病(癌症/糖尿病/心
臟病)﹐急性疾病(食物中毒/輻射/氣體中毒)。身體機能受損﹐死亡率上昇
Diseases (health risks): infectious diseases (AIDS / SARS / avian influenza),
chronic diseases (cancer / diabetes / heart diseases), acute diseases (food
poisoning / radiation / gas poisoning). impair physical functions, increased
death rate
(2) 醫療系統﹕抵禦疾病能力(沙士)﹐醫護人員充足率﹐醫療安全性(醫療事故)﹐
醫院承受能力 Medical system: ability to resist disease (SARS), sufficient
medical staff, medical safety (malpractice), capacity of hospitals
(3) 醫療開支﹕政府財政壓力﹐社會福利開支﹐病人財政負擔﹐削減醫療服務
Medical expenses: Government financial pressure, social welfare expenses,
financial burden of patients, reduce medical services
(4) 食物安全﹕入口檢疫﹐食物成份監管﹐食品銷售安全 Food safety: imports are
quarantined, supervise food ingredients, safety of food sales
(5) 健康教育﹕衛生意識﹐健康生活模式(運動)﹐食物選擇(營養標籤制度) Health
education: hygiene awareness, healthy lifestyle (exercise), food choices
(nutrition labeling system)
(6) 醫療科技﹕疫苗研發﹐治療藥物/儀器﹐科研人員培訓﹐藥品專利 Medical
technology: vaccine development, therapeutic drugs / tools, training for
professionals, drug patents

推論過程 Deduction﹕
沙士->市民對疫情了解不足->病毒危險性高->搶購藥品->物資短缺->社會恐慌 /
學校停課->顯示政府無力控制疫情->市民恐懼感增加->損精神健康 SARS  the
public lack the knowledge of the epidemic  high risk of virus  make panic
purchase of drugs  lack of goods and materials  social panic / closure of schools
 show that the government is unable to control the epidemic  people become
more worried  affect mental health

3
沙士經驗如何有助對抗甲型流感 How does the experience of having SARS help
resist Influenza A﹕
(1)市民衛生意識提高->防止流感傳播 Raise public hygiene awareness  prevent
the spread of influenza
(1) 通報機制建立->改善防禦措施 Establish notification mechanisms  improve
defensive measures
(2) 改善醫療系統->有效治療疾病 Improve the medical system  treat diseases
effectively
(3) 隔離病者措施->防止疫情在社區擴散 Isolate patients  Prevent the spread of
influenza in the community

中國政府應否在出現傳染病時向公眾公佈疫情 Should the Chinese government

announce the outbreak of infectious diseases to the public﹖
(1)提高國民防禦傳染病的意識 Raise public awareness of resisting infectious
diseases
(1) 減低公眾恐慌(互聯網令資訊流通) Reduce social panic (the Internet
intensifies the flow of information)
(2) 防止疫情擴散(邊境防疫/疫區) Prevent the spread of the epidemic
(quarantine at border / epidemic area of infectious disease)
(3) 高透明度(改善國家形象﹐中國與世界各國互信增加) High transparency
(improve national image, build mutual trust between China and worldwide
countries)

4
 Hong Sir Regular Plan B

政府禁煙措施有否損市民利益﹖Does the government smoking ban harm the

interests of citizens? (8 分) 控煙=禁煙﹖smoking control = smoking ban?

並無損害市民利益的論點 The viewpoints of not harming the interests of citizens

(1) 禁煙保障市民健康 (提高生活素質) The smoking ban protects the health of
citizens (raise quality of life)
(2) 減少市民稅務負擔(醫療開支減少/薪俸稅及利得稅率降低)) Reduce the
taxation burden of the citizens (reduce medical expenses/reduction of salaries
tax and profits tax rate). 累進稅 Progressive taxation
(3) 提高醫療素質(呼吸道疾病/肺癌率降低﹐公立醫院輪候時間減少) Inprove the
medical quality (reduction of respiratory diseases/lung cancer rate, reduced
waiting time in public hospitals)
(4) 舒緩人際關係矛盾(家庭/公司/公共空間) Alleviate the contradictions within
interpersonal relations (family/company/public space)

損害市民利益的論點 The viewpoints of harming the interests of citizens﹕

(1) 剝削市民自由權利。反駁﹕擁有自由權利不等於行為不受限制﹔自由只有在
不損害別人利益時﹐才獲得保護﹔二手煙損他人健康﹔損他人呼吸潔淨空氣
的權利﹐無異於慢性謀殺 Exploit the freedom and rights of citizens.
Counter-argument: Owning the freedom and rights doesn’t mean the actions
are not restricted. Freedom can only be protected when it’s not harming others’
interests. As secondhand smoke damages the health of others and exploits
others’ rights to breathe clean air, it is the same as chronic murder
(2) 低下階層失去廉價娛樂。反駁﹕政府在決策時應具備長遠眼光﹔短期的個人
享受將會變成長期的社會負擔(醫療)﹔政府有責任糾正市民錯誤的行為(吐痰
/仍垃圾等) The lower class loses their cheap entertainment. Counter-argument:
The government should be far-sighted when deciding the policies. Short-term
personal enjoyment will become a long-term social burden (medical). The
government is responsible to correct the wrong actions of the citizens.
(Spitting/littering etc.)
(3) 助長非法活動(走私香煙/為黑社會的非法活動提供資金)。反駁﹕政府可修改
法律﹐加強刑罰﹔加強情報交流﹐打擊跨境非法活動﹔政府不應該因政策有

5
 副作用而卻步﹔只要該措施利大於弊﹐政府就應該推行。(最低工資實行導致
黑工出現) Encourage illegal activities (smuggling cigarettes/providing funds for
the illegal activities of the criminal organization) Counter-argument: the
government can amend the law to enhance the punishment and strengthen
information exchange to shut down cross border illegal activities. The
government should not step back just because there is side effect in the policy.
As long as the policy does more good than harm, the government should
implement it. (The implementation minimum wage caused the occurrence of
illegal labor)
(4) 打擊零售行業(便利店/報販)。反駁﹕社會利益應該凌駕於個人利益﹔政府可
推出補償措施﹔禁止售賣香煙對生意影響輕微(便利店售賣眾多不同產品)
Hit on retailing industries (convenience stores/news vendor) Counter-argument:
the social interests should be placed above personal interests. The government
can introduce compensation policy. Forbid the selling of cigarettes has little
effect for the business (The convenience store sells a lot of different products)

程度題目﹕
(1) “最低工資可改善市民生活素質。”你在什麼程度上同意這個說法﹖“The
minimum wage can improve the quality of life of the citizens.” To what extent
do you agree with this statement?
(2) 你多程度上同意政府政府定立貧窮線的政策 To what extent do you agree with
the government’s policy in setting the poverty line﹖
(3) 在什麼程度上醫學美容事故由政府監管不足所導致 To what extent are the
medical cosmetology incidents caused by the insufficient supervision from the
government﹖