The government informing people of financial projections for the bridge and how it is expected to recover its massive construction costs;

The government informing taxpayers how much of the costs they will be expected to contribute, and over what period;

The government announcing a contingency plan for the bridge in the event that it fails to meet revenue projections and becomes a burden on the public purse;

The government asking people whether they actually want the bridge or not.

National leaders like to commemorate their egos with massive prestige projects, but all too often these go awry. They may turn out, like the Three Gorges Dam, to cause enormous environmental damage. Or, like other major transport projects, they may never generate enough revenue to recover their enormous construction costs.

While the government has dribbled out titbits of information from time to time, I don't believe the Hong Kong public has been given anywhere near a full and clear picture of the costs, benefits, impact and risks of this project. (It should be noted that these costs will probably include the loss of hundreds of jobs associated with ferry services across the Delta.)

In view of this, I hope Legislative Council members will ensure that the public is given full and frank information on the points raised above, and properly consulted on the plan, before they vote to allocate any public money to this project beyond whatever is needed for preliminary investigations.

Rod Parkes, Tai Po

Trophy project a total waste

While Hong Kong has a large budget surplus this is no excuse to throw money at trophy projects. I refer to the proposal to spend HK$135 million to host the 2011 session of the International Olympic Committee, for which the most optimistic estimates foresee revenue of less than HK$110 million.

The quoted sum of HK$25 million for 30 support staff is particularly alarming. This is almost HK$1 million per person - well above the average Hong Kong salary.

With the strong demand in the region for conference facilities and the short supply of five-star hotel rooms and facilities because of the closure of many central hotels there are certainly commercial opportunities that would entail zero cost to the public purse and similar or better projected revenues. These would equally enhance our reputation as a tourism destination.

Meetings like the IOC are just an excuse for many members to have a subsidised holiday at the expense of their own and the host country's taxpayers.

Let the other six countries who are bidding for the honour squander their resources. While we have hundreds of thousands of residents living at a subsistence level, some of them in squalid caged housing, the money should be used to better the conditions of Hong Kong people.

Candy Tam, Wan Chai

Photos damage HK's reputation

The recent nude photos saga exposes how ugly we are. After the release of hundreds of photos on the Web - supposedly involving Edison Chen Koon-hei and his girlfriends - the police took swift action to arrest a few allegedly involved in releasing the photos.

Then we heard strong criticism against the police, especially after the commissioner made a comment on whether possession of obscene articles breached the law. Some even linked the saga to Article 23 legislation, saying this incident would create an opportunity for the police to abuse its power to control our media.

I have not seen any of these photos, not because I cannot find the source but because I can't find an excuse to look at them. It is none of our business. They took the photos for self-entertainment, not for sale or publicity purposes - or for uploading on the Web.

What we are seeing is nothing but an intentional breach of privacy, like forcibly entering into a house and watching a woman showering in front of us.

We should stand up against those who uploaded and spread these photos across the globe, making Hong Kong a laughing stock and damaging our reputation.

Philip Keung, Kwun Tong

Saga exposes our naivety

The police are wasting public money and judicial resources in prosecuting people for putting pictures of nude celebrities on the Web. Such action cannot stop their circulation. What is the point in pursuing prosecutions?

Such action serves no purpose other than giving the pictures more publicity. Gillian Chung Yan-tung said she was naive.

Not only are our stars naive, our mass media players are naive. The police are even more naive. We are all naive because we have a naive culture.

The stars are mature human beings and the pictures only show their normal sex life. We should admit that sex is one of the basic needs of human being, and we should not expect stars to be any different. These kinds of pictures are all easily available on the Web.

We need to stop publicising the existence of these pictures on the Web in our mass media and let the matter die down.

All prosecutions should be stopped and we should assess the impact of the internet on our culture. Do we want to keep our heads deep in the ground, or lift our heads to see what is going on in the world?

S. Lo, The Peak

Fame game

Let's not be so hypocritical. If the victims were not famous, their photos would not have been so widely circulated, the press would not have created the headlines, the arrest of the first suspect would not have been mentioned at a Legislative Council meeting.

The public and the press have not treated this as an ordinary case from the very beginning.

I remember when lawmaker Albert Ho Chun-yan was attacked, the police commissioner had to hold a meeting with legislators, and the chief executive issued a statement promising the police would catch the suspect even if he/she escaped to the end of the world.

Why didn't the legislators ask then if there was one standard for the famous and another for the rest? Or can the displeasure of influential people make the police jump at the expense of other tasks?

Susan Chan, Wan Chai

Out of pocket

When shopping at my local ParknShop (Cloudview at Tai Tam) I saw an expatriate resident whom I know purchasing an item that was on special offer. He took two from the shelf. I asked him why did he not take a third as the offer was 'buy two, get one free'.

Only when he asked me how I knew this did I notice that the label advertising the offer was written only in Chinese. After a quick tour of the rest of the supermarket, I determined that at this very cosmopolitan location all labels advertising promotions were only displayed in Chinese. Discriminatory, I don't think so; hurtful, plainly yes.

T. S. Wu, Mid-Levels