Advertisement
Advertisement

Tsang gets himself in a heritage twist over on-air sermon

It seems to be a national pastime to take a swipe at our beleaguered chief executive, yet he does appear prone to self-inflicted wounds - particularly when he is caught sermonising on the radio.

Recently, he did himself damage with his on-air assurance that pollutant particulates do not pose a health threat. This weekend, in his latest RTHK Letter to Hong Kong, he made an ingenious correlation between preserving heritage and the risk of Hong Kong losing its competitive edge in the global economy ('Heritage and development must exist side by side, says Tsang', January 29).

What exactly he was saying is for you to fathom. Nevertheless, I doubt one would hear the same warnings from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg or his London counterpart, Ken Livingstone, as both cities seem to be prospering quite nicely with their considerable tracts of heritage - despite the squeezed confines of Lower Manhattan and the City of London. I also doubt we shall hear Macau Chief Executive Edmund Ho Hau-wah complain that the greater protection now afforded his city or the steps of St Paul's is becoming a 'worrying trend' - although, unlike his smaller jurisdiction, our city seems to possess a piffling 500 or so buildings worthy of inclusion on a heritage list (scattered across an area the size of greater London, few of these can be said to pose a blockage to our infrastructure).

No one is saying that 'development and conservation are mutually exclusive', that it is an all-or-nothing battle. It is Mr Tsang who is raising this spectre.

In Sunday's puzzling broadcast, he played both the defence and prosecution, expressing the need to preserve collective memory yet hinting that legislation to protect heritage might damage investment.

'We cannot afford heritage preservation if we do not preserve our economic sustainability. The two go hand in hand,' he declared.

I agree, Mr Tsang, but have you considered the dramatic notion that our economic sustainability might actually be assisted by preserving our remaining heritage?

CHRIS COWELL, Kennedy Town

Still awaiting an answer

I have followed with amazement the exchange of letters following Christine Loh Kung-wai's recent article 'An overriding public need' (January 4). From these it is clear that, despite the denials of the secretary for housing, planning and lands, no proper public consultation was ever conducted on Central Reclamation Phase III.

On January 18, Winston Chu Ka-sun of the Society for Protection of the Harbour asked when the government had carried out 'any consultation giving the public a fair opportunity to object to Phase III in accordance with the Court of Final Appeal's judgment' on harbour reclamation ('Logic defied on Phase III').

As the minister has still been unable to answer this simple question, he owes an apology not only to Ms Loh and Mr Chu, but also to the public and, particularly, those who tried to save the Star Ferry Clock Tower and are still trying to save Queen's Pier.

Why is this important matter not brought up for a public debate in the Legislative Council? The public is entitled to know whether there has been any dereliction of duty by any government official leading to the loss of our central harbour and heritage icons.

If so, the official concerned should be publicly reprimanded.

L.S. LUI, Causeway Bay

Contorted identity

Perhaps Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee should go back to Stanford, or maybe she shouldn't have gone at all. Her piece 'In search of an identity' (January 15) is characterised by typical ivory-tower flaws, among them irrelevance to the real world and an inability to make a point.

Contorted sentences and highfalutin vocabulary cannot disguise the fact that she is sorely unfamiliar with her topic. How else can one explain a column about our cultural heritage and identity that mentions only the entertainment industry, shopping malls and dim sum?

Despite the lack of a clear thesis, her intention seems to be to cast doubt on the validity of opposition viewpoints (some things never change). Witness the phrases 'feverish and divisive' and 'advocates of heritage conservation at any cost'. Does she really think these are fair descriptions?

Her final sentence presents a completely false dichotomy for our historical identity - a 'thrifty, hard-working past' or 'today's runaway opportunism'.

Does she actually know anything about Hong Kong's heritage? Does she know about walled villages where ghosts and people share narrow pathways, fung shui graveyards overlooking the ocean, seven-storey housing estates with shared toilets that remind us how far we've come, heritage trails like Ping Shan and Lung Yeuk Tau, priceless architecture like urban temples and pillared buildings, ways of life like wet markets and dai pai dongs, icons like Central Police Station and the former marine police headquarters in Tsim Sha Tsui, themed districts (who needs theme parks?) like Ap Liu Street and Wedding Card Street.

I hope the people in charge of our heritage conservation are better informed than the well-educated Mrs Ip. Maybe her next degree should be a bit closer to home.

LUKE DEKOSTER, Yau Ma Tei

Just ask employers

Education sector legislator Cheung Man-kwong does not agree that the English standards of Hong Kong Chinese students are on the decline, as immigration tests in Australia show (''F' for HK students in English proficiency stakes', January 30). However, I do not think his explanation - that most 'elite students' stay at home or go to the US and Britain - reflects the standard of English either. In the end, it is for employers represented by the Hong Kong chambers of commerce to make the judgment.

The writing is on the wall that Hong Kong students are not proficient enough in English to compete in today's international business environment. They lack the ability to write creatively, logically and concisely, and to make and defend business proposals sensibly.

Many countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development start nourishing English language skills from primary school. However, one should not pass the ball to the educator. The government should also do its bit to encourage parents and children to use English more.

It is plain that employers are not satisfied with the products of Hong Kong's education. For the sake of the city's international position, it is important for the government to address the issue beyond the elite students who make it into universities abroad.

ROSHANY CHAN, Tin Hau

Club's odds better

Lawrence Wong Chi-kong steps down as chief executive of the Hong Kong Jockey Club next month, leaving the 'once fusty institution freshened up and forward-looking', according to your feature 'Reining champ' (January 25).

Betting turnover has declined year after year since Mr Wong arrived at the Jockey Club. As a chief executive, his job should have been to remedy the situation. Because he could not do so, he should have resigned. Not only did he fail to do this, he managed to secure a second five-year contract.

Now that he is leaving the Jockey Club, we can see light at the end of the tunnel. With new chief executive Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges leading the club, I'm confident it will be an even better place.

Congratulations on your appointment, Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges.

EUGENE LI, Deep Water Bay

San Mig men forever

I enjoyed reading Kevin Sinclair's article ''Ole in the heart of NT Man' (January 30). It brought back many memories of The Better 'Ole bar at Luen Wo Hui.

However, as a regular there in the 1970s, I feel I should point out that the true NT man would never be seen drinking Carlsberg. We were (and remain) San Miguel men.

MIKE HORNER, Singapore

Peers across the years

Shortly before his death in 1590, Sir Francis Walsingham, principal secretary to Queen Elizabeth I for 17 years, wrote: 'As for titles, which at first were the marks of power and other rewards of virtue, they are now according to their name ... like the titles of books, which for the most part, the more glorious things they promise, let a man more narrowly peruse them over, the less substance he shall find in them.'

Reports in the South China Morning Post that police in Britain are conducting an inquiry into what has been labelled 'the peerage scandal' suggest that the patronage system

that so offended the Puritan principles of Sir Francis is still alive and well during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II.

COLIN CAMPBELL, Mid-Levels

Post