綠黨的黨魁是 Natalie Bennet ；有不少人甚至綠黨的支持者反而更希望綠黨的唯一國會議員 Caroline Lucas 擔任黨魁，情形有點像工黨不少內部聲音都偏愛 David Miliband 而不是他弟弟、現任的黨魁 Ed Miliband。Natalie Bennet 是堅實的社會主義者（甚至共產主義者），她的堅定信念是值得欣賞的，只是距離有效執政、管理國家，她跟她的政黨起碼暫時都是摸不著邊。她幾次被人問及重要的經濟議題以及被質問她提出的政策的可行性時都顯得虛怯，有次的電台訪問更 dead air 了好一會，她後來直認被主持人問得腦袋一片空白，這些都是她的致命傷。
綠黨的理念大概就是只要建立龐大的福利國 (Welfare state)，加強環境保護，人民就會（各方面）健康，生產力自然會上升，投資於人力資本亦必有豐厚的回報。只是，這些都不是一朝一夕的事，而要達成這些的願景，即使是長遠有可能邁向如此美好的彼岸，恐怕都需要無比的信念捱過一段中轉期。只是，不是每個人都有此等的信念。問問自己，想 take a leap of faith ，就不要怕，投綠黨！
保守黨是傳統的中間偏右的大黨，亦是最近一屆聯合政府內的多數黨；過去五年的聯合執政算是收拾了爛攤子，救活了經濟（在最近的經濟數據，英國在歐盟甚至其他發達國家中算是數一數二；大選的那一個季度 GDP 的增長卻見輕微倒退），只是收支依然是未如承諾般平衡，而國債仍在堆疊。雖然保守黨聯合自民黨已經出人意料地穩定施政，只是他們的保守路線往往令最重的負擔落在社會上較微弱的肩膀上，而不少選民都認為罪在保守黨。因此，保守黨的支持度是跌了不少的。
保守黨的黨魁是 David Cameron；根據不同的民調，他個人的支持度是在眾多黨魁中最高的，他的形象討好正正跟工黨的 Ed Miliband 造成一個對比－更有趣的是，跟各自的政黨比起來，David Cameron 比自己的黨支持度高，而 Ed Miliband 恰恰就是領導一個比自己支持度高的政黨。（位置對調的話，大概這次的選舉就沒有懸念了。）
今次的大選，蘇格蘭民族黨似乎選定了反保守黨、願意支持工黨的路線（當然，正如之前的文章提到工黨黨魁 Ed Miliband 對此是堅決拒絕的）。但是選民不應該善忘，在戴卓爾夫人挑戰工會、清拆工廠前，保守黨在蘇格蘭仍把握相當數量的議席時，蘇格蘭民族黨曾經是一個右翼政黨，再者在工黨的 James Callaghan 在任英國首相期間，上世紀七十年代，正正就是蘇格蘭民族黨出於工黨不能為蘇格蘭成功爭取權力下放（建立蘇格蘭國會）而發動不信任動議拖垮執政的工黨。
可以說明的是，一個民族主義政黨在意識形態上是沒有固定立場的，為了自己的國家及政黨的利益，它可以向左擺，亦能向右擺。工黨的 Ed Miliband 亦曾經對 Nicola Sturgeon 的蘇格蘭民族黨有過相關的指控。
工黨的黨魁是 Ed Miliband；在他的領導下，工黨重新調整了它的意識形態， Ed Miliband 更曾經大膽承認自己是社會主義者 (Socialist) 。事實上，在競選黨魁時，他就是憑較左的政治路線嬴得工會的支持，擊敗自己的哥哥 David Miliband 。而競選時的兄弟相爭更被保守黨的人借機攻擊 Ed Miliband －指他是個陰險的人 (backstabber) ，為了權位即使兄弟也不放過，更聲言如果 Ed Miliband 當選的，他日必會把蘇格蘭民族黨 (Scottish National Party) 引狼入室，對聯合王國放暗箭。而事後大概因為保守黨的指控太無稽，保守黨反被指出言惡毒。
要探討工黨今次的大選，不得不再細述一下黨魁 Ed Miliband。他在這次的大選可謂是一個神奇人物。在選戰開始前，他曾經醜態百出，包括在批評他保守黨的對手離地而聲稱自己代表工人階級時被問及一般人平日每週買雜物的平均花費時卻被難倒、吃三文治時的醜態、以及被人攻擊他奇貌不揚神似卡通人物 Wallace:
更有一段時間傳出黨內對是否支持由他出任黨魁有分裂意見、有人想密謀奪位的風聲。
後來塵埃落定、而工黨都不想由於黨魁的個人形象而影響政黨重新執政的機會。所以都放下爭執，全力支持及在社交網絡上為 Ed Miliband 扭轉他的形象：
而 Ed Miliband 亦不斷爭取更多的電視辯論以增加曝光率以及對廣大選民證明他是首相的材料，一洗以往的醜態形象。
工黨在今次大選的選戰路線是：批評執政的保守黨雖然令經濟好轉，但是卻要最貧苦的國民承受最大的打擊，而且執政黨亦不能兌現在任期內平衡收支的承諾。工黨亦指出保守黨增加的就業機會是不穩定的工種，例如兼職，零工時合約 (zero-hour contract)（只是，事實上，被工黨形容為萬惡的零工時合約只佔新就業機會的 2% ，而且有人亦認為零工時合約是可以為僱傭雙方帶來彈性）。工黨亦曾經警告執政黨會引發生活開支危機 (Cost of living crisis)，只是後來通脹率偏低，而令他們的指控失效。工黨最終想帶出的訊息是保守黨縱使實施嚴苛的政策，但是都不能 "fix everything"。雖然工黨不希望保守黨再次執政，但是Ed Miliband 已多次堅決反對跟蘇格蘭民族黨合作，即便這是他們組成聯合政府 (coalition government) (有別於少數派政府, minority government) 的（唯一）可行途徑。
工黨聲稱他們 "Got a better plan for Britain"，而他們認為 "Britain only succeeds when working people succeed"。事實上，各大政黨都聲稱自己會為所謂的 working people 發聲、爭取權益。Working people 相信那一邊就是他們的抉擇了。
工黨這次的政治宣傳片找來 Martin Freeman （曾出演 Lord of the Rings 的哈比人、福爾摩斯電影的 Doctor Watson）來念一段獨白，或俗稱「背書」：（筆者覺得有點硬銷、有點納悶，去片大家自己看看）
工黨競選團隊自知選民不信任他們的財政管理，所以他們承諾他們會每年都減少財赤（但沒有確實說明收支平衡的時間表）。他們亦坦白承認雖為左翼政黨，他們仍需要在受保護的公共開支外削減開支（所以工黨亦被今年大打進步路線的蘇格蘭民族黨攻擊他們是跟右派保守黨沒有大分別－是 Tory lite）。而 Ed Miliband 說他不想他領導的政黨有太多數字上明確的承諾，因為他希望他的政黨是 "under-promise and over-deliver"，而不是"over-promise and under-deliver")。
最後，講一講工黨在今次選舉的重點政策。
在經濟方面，工黨承諾他們會把財赤逐年遞減，方法包括對社會保障 (Social security) 及兒童福利 (child benefit)開支增長封頂、停止對富有的退休人士發放冬季燃料補助、開徵新稅（主要增加富裕人士的社會負擔）例如豪宅稅 (Mansion tax)。而在稅務改革上，工黨主打廢除一個名為 non-dom status 的稅項豁免權，聲稱要禁止外地富裕人士長居英國但又不用為其海外的收益繳稅（但是有評論員指出其實只有少部分人濫用這個稅項豁免權，保守黨財長甚至工黨的影子財長 (Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer)都曾經提出廢除 non-dom status 的連帶影響最後有可能令總稅收減少）。
由於經濟問題是今次大選的重要話題，怎樣平衡帳簿 (Balance the fiscal budget)是可謂「重中之重」，所以自由民主黨提出他們會平衡收支以及減少國債，以免債務重擔傳至下一代。他們亦源用上次選戰的類似策略，指工黨會輕視國債、過度開支、借貸度日，而保守黨則太沉迷削減開支，引致國民福利保障受損，公營事業（例如英國人最鍾愛的 National Health Service)無法有效運作。Nick Clegg 的宣傳口號是 "We will finish the job of getting the deficit down/ balancing the book, but do so FAIRLY" 。
如果你手持英國護照或其中一個 Common-wealth Countries 的護照或香港特區護照，而人在英國的，只要你在限期日（４月２０日）前登記為選民，就可以投下你神聖的一票。而不可以投票的，留意下一下英國這個歷史最悠久的民主政體的大選新聞，增長一下自己的政治智慧亦未嘗不可呀。 說不定香港的朋友們，他日人在英國，可以參與民主的選舉，都用不著盲投嘛。
英國國會的組成？
英國的國會基本上分為上議院 (House of Lords) 及下議院 (House of Commons) ，上議院不是選舉產生的，所以今次國會大選選的就是下議院。
So it's the start of the year; January is a month when the governments and business corporations review how the past year has fared and try to gauge what is in stock for the coming year.
For big businesses, Apple seems to have been a big winner recording a handsome amount of quarterly profit (the greatest there ever is so they say) up to December with the other "Big Fours"- Google, Amazon, and Facebook- doing just well along-side. Apple is going big (quite literally with its out-of-norm gigantic iPhone 6 Plus) and up- just as its home-base country. The US economy is looking up or has turned the page (quoting the words of Obama).
Let's have a look at the bigger picture of the state of the United States; It has seen consistent positive growths, ever diminishing budget deficits, finally pulled back the last combat force from Afghanistan though whether it actually has happened is debatable and quickly found themselves stepping into a new conflict in the Middle East. But the US economy has surely picked up from the slumber and grim outlook during the years of recession started in 2008, whilst Obama has scored preliminary success in his push for implementation of the Affordable Care Act, or more commonly known as the Obamacare. This all should have made it easier for the POTUS to deliver his State of the Union address on the third Tuesday of the month. It was, however, the least watched address since the year 2000: drawing only a little more than 30 million audiences (consider the population of the US standing at 316 million) either streaming or watching it from cable TV.
Still, the State of the Union address is something to look forward to. And mimicking entertainment videos, they actually made a teaser for the address:
Talking about all the positives and the sense of optimism do give you something to cheer for, although in the chamber it still is mostly the Democracts cheering for the president and the Republicans with a grumpy face only occasionally giving standing ovation when the POTUS talked about patriotic stuff which everybody feels obliged to feel positive and give salutes.
On a side note, the address was more like a celebration party than a pronouncement of the set of policies the president is trying to lay out. People are clapping, cheering, giving standing ovation, and the president taking credits for the most trivial stuff at times stretchy- you'd wonder if all politicians are a bit deluded. The lack of champagne is what makes it not a party. But I shouldn't be complaining about this, because I've seen worse here at home.
Trying to strike a note of similar positivity, Hong Kong's top officials do not have the same ground to be so optimistic. If the US senators and the president were deluded, C.Y. Leung and his underlings were knowingly lying to the public.
The European Union was troubled, not least by its neighbour motivated almost fanatically by the fickle leader Mr Vladimir Putin. Deflationary pressure across the Euro-zone has piled on so much pressure that Mario Draghi (the president of the European Central Bank) saw no other options but to succumb to the enticing quantitative easing in the footstep of America, Britain and Japan. The possible outcome of Greek default and leaving the Euro-zone (or so-called Grexit) brought to the surface by the unsettling though somewhat expected victory in the parliamentary election by the radical left party Syriza does not only encourage similar movements in Spain (propelled by Podemos, another anti-austerity party of similar style to its Greek counterparty) and Italy, but also threaten the very fabric of the Euro-zone and might just tear it apart.
Contrary to all these messes, our local clever, talented, sometimes exploiting tycoon Li Ka-shing (or better known as "superman" locally), according to Bloomberg, boldly made a wager asserting that he saw the future in Europe (implying: not Hong Kong). He followed through with his actions; the latest news of him negotiating to buy O2 possibly merges it with Three he already owns thus reducing the UK telecom industry to "Big Three"- O2 & Three, Vodafone and EE- is just one of the many acquisitions he has already made.
So what about Hong Kong? China's economy is decelerating, though they insist it is not a "hard landing". And China's grip on Hong Kong's way of life is ever tighter when the sovereignty is launching the hardest campaign against the ubiquitous graft and corruption across the country. This transition period is tough for Hong Kong, so tough indeed that many Hongkongese become disillusioned and desperately trying to cope. These days, people learn to come to terms with things however ridiculous they are (yes, I'm partly referring to the current incidents of ATV); in fact, people are starting to lie to themselves such that they do not have to live in the unbearable reality which they know is unhealthy in the long run. It's quite hard to stay all positive and optimistic in Hong Kong because it's bad, it's really bad. So when I scoff at the naivete displayed by the US congress and the fuss European countries got themselves into, I stop to remember where I am and I can't laugh no more. Because I've seen worse.
