Advertisement
Advertisement

Talkback

Q Should the Star Ferry Pier and clock tower be saved?

I was a young fellow in the 1960s. I liked going to the City Hall library. People then were considerate - normally we did not make noise. The chime from the big clock was the only sound in the library. It was stern but also soft - just like the voices of parents telling us time was passing quickly. And it does; I will be 60 soon! Those were the days I can never forget.

The environment was so quiet and tranquil. Sometimes it could also be romantic; I might come across a nice girl. A shared glance or soft smile was something special.

Things have changed since then. People have become greedy and aggressive. The government has become irresponsible and eager to remove the old things. It has taken too much away already. Please stop.

Oswald Chan Pak-fung, Tsim Sha Tsui

It's getting to the point where one can essentially write the same letter of disbelief yet merely change the name of the Hong Kong icon that faces impending demolition. Next up, the Star Ferry Pier. Apparently, the government is hell-bent on eradicating all places that are unique to Hong Kong. In what misguided way does the government think that relocating the Star Ferry will maintain its lure as a tourist attraction?

You cannot transfer the feel of a place no matter if you use original blueprints or not. The Star Ferry is one of those icons of Hong Kong that most people coming here wish to see. By demolishing the original site and route, it merely becomes just another ferry route; the Star Ferry no longer.

Gordon Shkurhan, Fanling

Q Do you think the five-day work week will hurt the catering industry?

The five-day work week as well as 'green dressing' are good ideas. It moves us forward as it reduces stress, which is a result of overwork, while promoting productivity in the workforce. One can't deny that the scheme will affect the catering industry as people take breaks from work.

Kalaya Moore, Lamma

On other matters ...

Two drivers were killed in two separate crashes along the Tuen Mun Highway last week. There were many factors involved in each case, but one similar factor that probably resulted in the drivers' loss of life was the roadside crash barriers.

On Saturday, a container truck ploughed through a low railing which looked unlikely to absorb the impact of a car let alone a truck. Such a weak and flimsy railing was supposed to prevent vehicles from plummeting up to 10 metres to the ground below.

Last Thursday, a truck driver rammed his vehicle into the left-hand railings, and was thrown from his vehicle as it flipped onto its side. The impact was so violent the front axle was dislodged. In this case, there was a slope to the left of the carriageway, hence no railings. The place where the driver hit, however, was where the slope ended and the railings began - such slope/railing pairings exist along all of the Tuen Mun highway. The railings, however, are square in shape: any vehicle hitting at speed the point where the railings begin is subject to disintegration.

Similarly, a family of three were killed seven months ago when the driver lost control of his van and it went off the road along the San Tin Highway.

It is high time concrete barriers were placed along highways so that vehicles 'bounce' back into the carriageway if they hit them. It is unacceptable for roads to remain unsafe.

G. Marques, Mei Foo Sun Chuen

As a former smoker, your news snippet ('Bus stop punch-up', July 15) caught my eye. The story twice mentioned that the instigator was a smoker, so we have to presume this was relevant to the story. However, you provided your readers with only a hint of what happened and, if we could be bothered, we would ask why did the fight start? Did the smoker object to the other man (who, I suppose, we should assume is a non-smoker) complaining about the smoker blowing smoke in his face or did he punch him simply because he didn't have a lighter?

Did you find out only some of the facts, or have you just fed us the first tantalising instalment of a new 'bus-stop smoking uncle' saga? Answers, please, on the back of a cigarette packet.

Maggie Lawton, Sai Kung

We refer to letters of your readers Peter Sherwood and Marianne Tulleners (July 11) on broadcasting arrangements for this year's Wimbledon championships.

We had every intention to show the match uninterrupted. We cannot brush away responsibility for the operational fault. We sincerely regret the error in judgment to break instead of continue the live broadcast. We have reviewed the lapse and wish to assure our audience that we are committed to improving our service to our loyal viewers.

We appreciate your readers' comments and understanding and apologise once again.

Winnie Ho, senior manager, corporate & community relations, external affairs division, TVB

Post