Let's check the annual statistics of Aids, which is spreading like wildfire. We are definitely not biased against the victims, but we should note that many of the Aids patients were affected due to their choice of free sex.

If it was only their own business, that's fine. But the result is that we as taxpayers have to pay with public health spending.

Also, our children are being influenced to accept that 'there is no right or wrong' in free sex. We, as hopeful parents, surely don't want to see that, and the dreadful result it may bring.

I wish the media would not focus on the voices of an active minority and forget about the cries of the silent majority. We are ordinary people having to work hard and really could not spare much time to do the protesting exercises like the homosexuals. As time goes by, we are actually the silent victims being bombarded to accept values we could never accept.

I and many of my contemporaries do support the decision of the Broadcasting Authority in ruling the recent RTHK gay marriage programme was one-sided and unfair.

L. Siu, Mid-Levels

It is immoral to broadcast something that is hurtful to our young generation. We cannot assume homosexuality is an alternative way of living or that it is acceptable as long as both parties agree to be responsible.

It makes no sense to say homosexuality is acceptable just to follow what other countries are doing. We have our own moral standard; we should not assume the community has widely accepted homosexuality. Think of our children, our next generation.

It was wrong to air the RTHK programme so early, when children could be watching. Moreover, we need to support our family value - 'one man and one woman'.

RTHK hasn't really respected the voice of the community; it hasn't sought public views on airing such a programme.

In Hong Kong, we always talk about how to improve our education system. I work in the education field. How can we maintain what we are now if RTHK allows the pollution to spread without seeking public opinion? All our young generation will think it is alright to be gay. They will become an irresponsible generation, because they don't have correct family values.

Alice Yeung, Tai Wai

Q Should the government ban the use of trans fats?

I take offence at Liberal Party lawmaker Vincent Fang Kang's comments that 'Hongkongers did not eat as many doughnuts and deep-fried food as westerners'.

I've been in fast-food joints and there are plenty of locals eating. There is an obesity epidemic in Hong Kong, which is unlikely to be solved by banning trans fats. Instead of quick fixes, people should have regular exercise and eat healthily. What a crazy idea!

Dr N. Yuen

Q What do you think of the redevelopment plan for Peel and Graham streets?

Paul Zimmerman wrote on March 12, alleging that a project of the Urban Renewal Authority at Peel Street and Graham Street would wipe 'an entire economy (the hawkers' bazaar) out of existence' and that it would be replaced by a living museum created by the URA with 'old brand' shops.

This is factually incorrect. I wish to stress that the URA has no intention at all to drive away the hawkers. On the contrary, the URA fully recognises that the street market forms part of the local character and proposes to retain and improve it.

We are setting up a conservation panel of district council members, local residents, conservation experts and hawkers to advise on ways to enhance the district, as well as the hawkers' market.

The idea of reviving Graham Street as Hong Kong's first 'old-shops street' is part of our effort to strengthen the character of the Central and Western District, which was once home to many old consumer commodities.

Through the preservation of three pre-war shop houses at Graham Street and the construction of a row of low-rise buildings, we would not only retain the existing streetscape character, but also bring back some lost charm.This proposal has been generally welcomed by the community and the media for its potential in enriching the heritage of the area.

A notable example is the Central and Western District Council, whose members at a meeting on March 8 expressed general support for the project and urged its early implementation.

Apart from welcoming the social benefits of the proposed project, they were anxious about the appalling living conditions of the area's residents, who have been yearning for the opportunity of redevelopment to improve their lot for the past 10 years.

On behalf of the residents, legislative councillor Dr Yeung Sum, of the Democratic Party, also wrote to us on January 5 pointing out that most of the buildings, which were built in the 1940s or 1950s, were in a serious state of dilapidation and urged the URA to speed up the project to create a better environment for those people affected.

Several Central and Western District Council members from the Democratic Party and the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong also have petitioned the URA in recent years for the early implementation of the project.

Furthermore, a survey conducted by the department of social work and social administration of the University of Hong Kong during a public exhibition of the design concept of the project at The Center in June 2006 found that 88 per cent of the interviewees were in support of the overall design and layout.

We appointed a professional consultant to conduct a detailed traffic impact study. The study confirms that, in general, the project meets the prevailing requirements of the Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines.

The only exception is on the provision of car parking space, for which we have reached an agreement with the government that instead of building a car park that would inevitably create more vehicular traffic, the project would offer loading/unloading space within the development to alleviate the existing on-street loading activities in the area.

As for the time schedule of the planning application, we note that a clarification had been made by the secretary to the Town Planning Board in her letter printed by you on March 12. We think that it is perhaps a bit unfair to say 'nobody is in town to comment' on the project.

Michael Ma, director of planning and design, Urban Renewal Authority

The council members agreed generally that the said urban renewal project should start early. If you have any questions on getting the information from the website, please call Miss Chan at 2852 3477 for assistance.

Central and Western District Council

On other matters...

After reading Lilian Goh's City story 'Sites for scattering loved ones' ashes fixed' (March 14), I did not know whether to laugh or cry.

The question of whether to permit flowers to be spread in the sea along with the ashes, or to ban or limit the amount of flowers, makes one think that the Deputy Secretary for Health, Welfare, and Food is either delusional or has too much time on his hands.

Anyone who has been on any water craft in Hong Kong territorial waters knows that the amount of pollution, the raw garbage dumped by builders, villagers and 'whoever does it in China', far exceeds the amount of flowers that could ever be dumped.

The Hong Kong authorities, which would include the Marine Department and I assume the above-mentioned deputy secretary, have done nothing to crack down on the myriad other polluters.

Before the good deputy secretary worries about the flowers, he should first do all possible to keep the waters clean and free of dumped garbage and building materials, which are not only disgusting and unhygienic, but are a major danger to boaters and swimmers. The flowers might even make the water smell better than it does now!

Zvi Enav, Discovery Bay