Where is their free time to be children?

One could consider these children fortunate, and in some ways they are. They are being given wonderful opportunities to experience a wide variety of activities. But when do they get time to play and be themselves? There is some hope for children at international schools, where learning through play is part of the curriculum, but, for many, play is an unfamiliar concept.

Children need time to develop physically and emotionally, and play enables them to do just that. They need time to play in their own way, with their own toys, devising their own games. Play will help define their characters and develop their creativity.

Encouraging talent is one thing, pushing children so hard they have no time to play is detrimental to their health. A 'civilised society' as Carina Pico Martinez writes in her letter, would not encourage this sort of abuse.

Let children be children while they still can. They will grow up and have to deal soon enough with the commitments and stresses that come with adult life.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Spare the monkeys

I grew as agitated as a monkey after a tourist's food reading your report on the tour operator who wants the government to take action against the 'aggressive wild monkeys' at Kam Shan Country Park ('Ecotour operator fears monkey attack in park', May 21).

If the tour operator took tourists to a primary school, he might be surprised to find children there. I thought people went to Kam Shan Park specially to see the monkeys. If they are nervous or afraid, they can always go to one of the dozens of other equally picturesque country parks where there are no monkeys.

Why should one or two nervous tour operators affect the lives of the monkeys? They are wild animals, doing what wild animals do. Will there be anywhere left for them to live?

I've been to Kam Shan a number of times to see the monkeys. I didn't carry any food or plastic bags, and I treated them with respect. They were peaceable and very interesting, and I would love to see them again.

Our children have so few chances to see animals in the wild, and our best examples, the olive macaques, are quietly and surreptitiously being eradicated like vermin. Many of us will miss the monkeys if the government decides they are dangerous and must be exterminated.

They are not dangerous at all if visitors to the parks behave responsibly.

Please, Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, spare these beautiful animals so that those of us who love them can visit them.

JENNIFER WU, Kwun Tong

A tale of two parks

Ocean Park and Hong Kong Disneyland make a perfect study in contrasts. One has been with us for close to 30 years, the other is a newcomer. One has more than 40 attractions, with another 30 to 40 being added; the other has a mere 15, with another three to be added over the next three years.

Ocean Park is truly a 'people's park', run by people in tune with the sentiments of the community and the tourism industry. Disneyland, on the other hand, exudes condescending, corporate imperialism at its worst. It is out of touch with local sentiments, elitist in its pricing, and arrogant in its dealings with the travel industry.

Ocean Park has established itself as a major tourist attraction, with a constant stream of visitors from all over the world, even as Disneyland struggles to get taxi drivers to come for free. Ocean Park has lots of people laughing and enjoying themselves; Disneyland has lots of people laughing at them.

A year ago, hopes for Disneyland were at their peak, driven by pre-opening hype and sophisticated marketing. Today those hopes have largely been shattered by high-profile blunders and hapless management. As majority owners of the park, and with US$3 billion of our hard-earned money ploughed into what was to be the clown..., er, crown jewel of Hong Kong, we clearly need to do something more than read and weep.

KARINA CHANG, Repulse Bay

Prejudice stinks

I refer to the Newsline programme on ATV last Sunday hosted by Frank Ching. Although obviously uncomfortable with the question, Ching asked an Indian guest whether she knew local Chinese complained that Indians smell.

Here we have a typical case of majority prejudice against minorities. It is unfair to generalise as the average Indian is in the good habit of showering every day.

I have met all kinds of people in my 45 years of living in Hong Kong and travelling overseas on business trips. Whether in Asia, Europe or the US, some Indians, Chinese and even westerners smell, whether due to the food they eat, the clothes they wear, or their economic circumstances. I am regularly approached for directions in Tsim Sha Tsui by tourists from the well-heeled to budget travellers, and some of them smell.

We are now in the 21st century. We should show some tolerance and be above such a prejudiced mentality.

RANJIT BHAWNANI, Tsim Sha Tsui

Suicide link tenuous

We refer to the article 'Suicides linked to insurance payouts' and the accompanying editorial, 'Insurers can help reduce suicide rate' (May 14).

Manulife strongly disagrees that life insurance policies without suicide clauses in any way motivate insured parties to commit suicide. We also disagree that longer term or permanent suicide-exclusion clauses would prevent people taking their own lives or reduce their number.

Evidence presented to support the connection between suicide and life insurance exclusion periods are tenuous at best. Furthermore, our experience indicates that most suicide claims involve policies that have been in force for several years.

Manulife takes the view that life insurance coverage should be provided unencumbered, with no exclusion other than the existing suicide clause. This provides certainty and protection to the beneficiaries in the event of an insured party's premature death from any cause.

All applicants for insurance must answer a number of health and lifestyle questions. People with a history of a psychiatric illness may be refused coverage or charged a higher premium. In some cases the suicide clause is extended. In carrying out this gate-keeping, we rely on applicants to answer our questions honestly and accurately. Once we have accepted the risk, we believe changes to the insured party's circumstances resulting in death - whether from suicide or another cause - should be covered.

Finally, although the US practice of a two-year suicide clause is quoted as the benchmark, many countries have exclusion clauses with shorter durations. These include Singapore (12 months) and Britain, Australia and New Zealand (all 13 months).

MICHAEL HUDDART, executive vice-president, Manulife (International)