However, we need to consider a number of factors including the feasibility of the scheme, its possible adverse effects and the root of the drug problem.

I think the scheme could prove costly and questions would need to be asked about who would carry out the tests and administer the scheme, and how records would be stored.

Schools and teachers would face a dilemma. The tests could identify pupils who were using drugs. But the school could as a result be stigmatised as an institution which has drug users.

It could damage the relationship between teachers and pupils.

The tests would also increase the teachers' workload and they would need training for the scheme.

Moreover, juvenile drug use has increased because drugs are easily available and cheap.

I do not think the tests will solve these problems and help to root out people selling drugs.

Our law enforcers should put more effort into arresting drug traffickers and increase the penalties for trafficking.

This may put more people off selling drugs and they will then not be readily available.

I also think there should more talks about drugs for parents and children, so they can learn more about the destructive effect of taking illegal drugs.

Parents should be taught to recognise the signs that their children may be taking drugs.

I certainly think there must be further discussion before any testing scheme is introduced.

We need to explore other ways of dealing with this problem and helping students who are taking illegal drugs.

Cindy Tam, Kwun Tong

Law must change to protect sex workers

I am disappointed that the Security Bureau does not plan to review the legislation relating to prostitution, even though eight sex workers have been killed in the past 12 months ('Ease curbs on sex workers, say activists, experts', January 18).

If greater decriminalisation of prostitution could save lives, it is surely cold-hearted not to act.

The government has urged neighbours to help one another out in case of robberies, but it will prosecute if two women share one brothel.

In fact, the women could help each other out if there is a robbery.

What is the main reason behind the law that [police will act against] two women in a brothel but not one woman?

Moreover, if they want to hire security guards to protect them, they are not allowed to since the guards would be charged with living off the proceeds of prostitution. This is absolutely absurd.

If the relevant government departments take no action and more prostitution-related crimes occur, the reputation of this city will be damaged.

Hong Kong will gain notoriety, rather than being considered a world-class city.

P. W. Yung, Wan Chai

Christian leaders have their own agenda

As they have done on many occasions in the past, some of Hong Kong's Christian leaders are stirring up opposition to the Domestic Violence Ordinance amendments on religious grounds as a means to pursue their true agenda.

We must remember that these people represent only a very small minority in our society. But they are well organised and highly vocal and they are constantly seeking new ways to create their own 'cultural revolution' in Hong Kong society by hijacking the discussion of major social issues in order to impose their values and beliefs on the rest of us.

They should instead focus on living their lives according to their own religious ideals, especially by following Christ's teaching to deal with their own imperfections before attacking those of others, by 'casting out the mote in thine own eye first'.

They should not interfere with the rights of other people - including gay people - to live their lives in their own ways, even if they disapprove of them.

In this respect, they could learn a great deal from the tolerance and respect for others shown by Buddhists and people of other great religions, as well as many of their more enlightened brethren around the world.

As for the rest of us, we should remember the famous quote of Edmund Burke: 'All it takes for evil to triumph in the world is for good men to do nothing.'

We should all stand up and defend the weak and vulnerable in our society, because one day we may become the victims of violence and prejudice ourselves.

Ron Baker, Tung Chung

Why is Mugabe's daughter allowed in?

I refer to the report ('Mugabe's wife accused of assault on photographer during HK visit', January 19).

What is Grace Mugabe doing in Hong Kong in the first place? Many countries have targeted sanctions against Robert Mugabe and his supporters, which disallow travel to their countries and freeze any finances belonging to them. But here in Hong Kong we appear to welcome them.

For that matter what is Robert Mugabe's daughter doing here in Hong Kong, allegedly studying?

She comes here and spends the money of ordinary citizens, while they are beaten and tortured back home. Send her back to be educated by the system that her father destroyed.

Let her join the starving, cholera-ridden folk back home. They have no choice, why should she?

Could the relevant department indicate why it allowed the daughter of a man who has so much blood on his hands to come to Hong Kong in the first place?

David Hodges, Lantau

Shame on Hong Kong

I refer to the report ('Mugabe's wife accused of assault on photographer during HK visit', January 19).

It is sad isn't it that I recall peaceful protesters being barred from entering Hong Kong whilst the wife of the self-titled President of Zimbabwe, head of one of the most bestial regimes in the world, is welcomed. So is his daughter.

She may claim to be apolitical but she did, according to reports, appear in support of her father during one of his 'election' rallies in the widely-acknowledged fake election of June last year.

Shame on Hong Kong. Where are your moral principles, or is it simply the case that money talks?

J. Fearon-Jones, Macau

Programme cut in half

I have written to CNN before regarding its programming policy.

My main gripe is that it has reduced Anderson Cooper 360? to Anderson Cooper 180? [Now TV and Cable in Hong Kong].

Every weekday after one hour of this two-hour programme, Anderson Cooper describes what is coming up in the second hour, only to have the network cut away from this second hour and replace it with timeless pieces of journalism that bear no relation to the second part of Cooper's programme.

The programming gurus at CNN have made the amazing decision to allow only half of this programme to be broadcast to Asia. Is this any way to run a railroad, never mind a global TV network?

No doubt there is some kind of internal reasoning for this daily faux pas but to CNN viewers in the region, it's a decision that just sucks.

James B. Nicholson, Koh Samui, Thailand