You’ve gotten old! 你老了! By Ronny TONG Ka Wah 湯家驊

“You’ve gotten old!” This isn’t a phrase you hear often in social settings; but for young people, it’s definitely what they most often want to say from the bottom of their hearts to certain elders they disapprove of, especially politicians or officials. “You’ve gotten old!” means you’re useless now! It’s time to step down.

Legislative Council President Andrew Leung, having served two terms and now 74 years old, announced he would not seek re-election. His words were barely out when a group of legislators aged 70 or even approaching 70 successively declared they would step down to make way for capable successors. For a time, legislators and officials nearing 70 all felt a sense of impending doom – had their time limit arrived?

Does being old mean one is incompetent? The situation in American politics seems to be the exact opposite. Ronald Reagan became US President just a month shy of his 70th birthday; but this record was soon broken by the 70-year-old Donald Trump. Four years later, Trump’s record was broken by Joe Biden, who assumed the presidency at 78; when Trump was elected again, he became the oldest successor to the US presidency. Some joke, asking if this is the reason for America’s decline? I wouldn’t dare say; but many are asking, in such a large, vast country, is it really impossible to find a young and promising person to enter politics?

To be fair, what qualities should a good political figure have? The answer, presumably, is a clear mind, broad vision capable of distinguishing right from wrong, and the determination to hold fast to ideals. Are these qualities more easily found in young people or in those with more experience? We all know the answer in our hearts.

But seeking talent cannot rely solely on data. There are high-quality young political novices, and there are also overbearing older politicians. Perhaps the deciding factor should be who rather than age. A good system should be one that widely incorporates capable individuals, not a rigid one. A system that changes personnel just for the sake of changing them is merely a rigid set of shackles that fails to achieve the desired outcome.

Nevertheless, from an institutional perspective, it is important to give young people more opportunities to realize their potential. On one hand, we must put an end to the culture of officials clinging to power, and on the other hand, we must have a mechanism that allows the capable to fully utilize their talents. Distinguishing between the two is a crucial skill.

你老了！這是一句社交場合不多聽到的話；但對年輕人來說，肯定是對一些他們不以為然的長者，特別是政客或官員最常想說的心底話。你老了！意思是說你沒用了！是退下的時候了。

立法會兩屆主席梁君彥以年屆74 歲為由，宣布不尋求連任。言猶在耳，一班年滿70 歲，甚至接近70的議員紛紛先後宣稱退位讓賢；一時年近70 歲的議員和官員人人自危，是否自己時限已到？

是否年老便不濟？美國政壇的情况卻似乎剛剛相反。列根以不足一個月便年屆70 之高齡就任美國總統；但這紀錄不久便被70 歲的特朗普打破。4年後，特朗普的紀錄又被拜登以年屆78 就任總統打破；到特朗普再當選時已是美國最年長的繼任總統。有人笑語這是否美國衰退的原因？不敢說；但很多人都在問，這麽大，這麼廣的國家，難道找一位年青有為的從政者也找不到？

平心而論，好的政治人物需要有什麼素質？答案相信是清晰的思路、能分辨對錯的廣闊視野及有堅持理想的決心。這些素質是年輕人還是閱歷較多的人比較容易擁有？大家心裏有數。

但是求人才不能只依賴數據。有好素質的年輕素人，也有專橫跋扈的年長從政者。也許決定關鍵應該是誰而不是年齡。好的制度應該是一個能廣納賢才而非硬梆梆的制度。一套為換人而換人的制度，只是一套刻板和不符合理想效果的制度枷鎖罷了。

儘管如此，從制度上而言，讓年輕人更有機會發揮他們的潛在力量是重要的。我們一方面要杜絕官員戀棧權位的文化，另一方面我們也要有能者盡用其才的機制。如何分別二者是一門重要學問。