bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

additionalInfoBoxes

quizIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

Should Umar Khatab  be allowed to stay in Hong Kong?
As a fellow Muslim and a father, I am deeply touched by the story of 13-year-old Umar Khatab, who is trying to stay with his brother in Hong Kong after the recent death of his father.
If not for the prospect of facing a judicial review, the Immigration Department was unlikely to agree to review Umar's case.
The department initially rejected Umar's application to remain, citing 'insufficient justification to warrant an exceptional approval'.
Well, apparently in the eyes of the department, being a young orphan who has been studying in a local school and whose brother has pledged to take care of him does not amount to sufficient justification.
Pray tell, what does then?
It is interesting to note that in hearing the judicial review application, even the judge could not conceal how he felt about the case, and hinted to the Immigration Department to do the right thing. Amid all this, Umar remains optimistic. He does not allow his uncertain status to deter him from achieving a goal he has set for himself, that is, to memorise the  Koran.
His determination, strength of character and, above all, faith, are things we can all learn from. Instead of turning him away, Hong Kong should welcome him.
Ghulam Rasul Butt, Discovery Bay
Should Cathay Pacific employers have access to staff medical data?
The point of contention underlying the issue is one between the company's interests and human rights.
Medical records contain  sensitive information that should not be disclosed without our consent. Even in situations under which companies may face financial losses because of the absence of a worker,  the same fundamental principles  apply.
It is  a matter of respect and how human rights are practised.   In no way in this case  does the need to intrude into one's privacy  outweigh public interest.
Employers should  trust  doctors' judgment, and accept  valid sick leave certificates.  If  they suspect   false information was given,  they may file a complaint  with the Medical Council.
If it is proven that deceitful ways were used to obtain sick leave, the problem will then be left to the code of ethics that govern  medical personnel.
At the end of day, all the  reasons given don't  justify giving someone the right to check our medical records.
The proper means should be pursued in handling  personal information.  The integrity of an employee  and whether we should intrude into that person's  privacy are separate issues.
There is also no knowing how private information would be used if not handled properly, and there are worries that such  information is manipulated by those who bear malicious intent.
Borromeo Li Ka-kit,  Kwun Tong
Will building a bypass  result in more cars?
It's very hard to say whether or not the bypass will result in more cars.   Most probably,  it will.
Although at first congestion may seem to improve, eventually, as suggested by former London mayor Ken Livingstone, the bypass may  fill up in two years or even just in two months.
We are experiencing an economic downturn now and  people will be more conscious of what they buy, and spend less on  luxury goods, including cars.  But there will still be people who prefer to drive.
On roads that are less congested, driving saves time.   Hence, some people   are encouraged to own a car.  We can all guess what happens next.
It is  clear  I am not a fan of the bypass. So what can we do?  I don't understand why we can't adopt  electronic road pricing, as  it is  very effective.
It is understandable  that it will be opposed,  but we can't just keep adding bypasses until all the usable space in Hong Kong is filled  with roads, or sacrifice the beautiful harbour just to  accommodate the number of cars.
The best way, therefore, is to  clearly explain the merits of  electronic road pricing  so  the public will understand and accept the plan.  But convincing the public will take time, as the plan requires car users to pay more.
Melissa Chen, Lam Tin
Hong Kong is one of the most fast-paced cities in the world. Busy people  demand  convenient road systems  and  this results in severe traffic congestion.
The Hong Kong government  deals with the problem  by building more roads, flyovers and so on. However,  this  cannot solve traffic congestion;  it just increases the number of drivers.  If more roads are built,  more cars will travel on them.  A driver who benefits from the convenience of an extra road will find it is no longer convenient when other drivers also use the road.
Let me give you one more example.  My room is always messy and full of books. When there is a new bookcase, I  fill it  up immediately. The  relationship between roads and cars works in a similar way.
More bypasses will give drivers more incentive to drive,  and  congestion will become more serious. No matter how many roads you build, they will fill up ultimately, maybe within 18 months or two years. That's the reason  I believe the bypass will result in more cars.
In addition, I am convinced that the only way to solve traffic  jams is bringing in  a congestion charge similar to  Mr Livingstone's scheme in London.
Giving up driving will be the consequence of high travel costs, when drivers cannot  afford to drive any more. When the number of cars decreases, pressure on roads will begin to decrease.  This is more effective than building more roads to solve traffic congestion.
Sharon Kong, Tsuen Wan



Talkback