選舉結束後，有人說社民連三子入局，如今議事堂聲音嘈吵了，麻煩多了。
其實有乜問題？全世界民主社會議事堂都是嘈到拆天，我睇過英國國會辯論，紳士又點？首相演說時一樣會被反對派噓！先不講極端的台灣，大家可看看日本及南韓，他們的議會辯論精采到暈。
想議會風平浪靜，除非是在極權社會，又或在八十年代前的殖民地社會，根據前輩老惠說(當年他是跑法庭新聞)，一切法例都是無反對下順利通過，議員同意就Say AI，所以當時的議員又有AI、AI Sir的稱號。
議事堂是議事，以理服人，雖然有部分議員聲大及咄咄逼人，但難道世界民主社會的議員又會沉默寡言，投票時又自動親政府嗎？
老實說，政府不算施政失誤，也有很多司長、局長及秘書長十分盡責和專業。反對派的責任是做唐太宗的魏徵或長孫無忌──皇上要多聽諫官之言，有時忠言可能逆耳，言論也未必全部正確，但多聽就對施政有更多範疇能兼顧，就更多市民能得益！
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
