Advertisement
Advertisement

Letters

Little change in Australia's asylum policy

The letter from Chris Evans, Australian minister for immigration and citizenship ('Rise in asylum seekers is a global problem,' August 19), regrettably risks confusing two separate but related issues.

What the minister fails to consider is that a lack of safe channels, where people in genuine need of protection can seek asylum, leaves them with little or no alternative but to use the services of agents and people smugglers.

The commitment of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's government to implement 'one of the toughest and most sophisticated border security regimes in the world' unfortunately risks harming some of the most vulnerable members of society. These are people who Australia has both a moral and legal obligation to protect.

It is all very well to criticise the previous administration's mandatory detention policy which saw 'children locked up behind razor wire and people languishing in detention centres for years'. And one can only hope the current administration is as committed as it says it is to bringing such practices to an end.

However, according to recent submissions by the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre to the National Human Rights Consultation, children may no longer be held in immigration detention centres, but are instead held in what are euphemistically termed 'places of detention'.

Furthermore, the Rudd administration appears to be reneging on its earlier commitment to abolish the former government's policy of mandatory detention.

The continued use of the notorious Christmas Island detention centre for the purpose of screening irregular arrivals risks further legitimising the abuse of asylum seekers.

The human rights violations that have occurred in this facility have been well documented, which is in many ways unsurprising, given the fact that it was built to high-security prison-like specifications. All this seems to reaffirm that Australia's policies towards 'protecting' the needs of asylum seekers have changed very little.

Che Singh Kochhar-George, Pok Fu Lam

Wasteful lights at culture hub

It is obvious, from the photo of the West Kowloon sign accompanying the article 'Harbour watchdog wants more teeth' (August 10), that our government has not quite got the concept of sustainable development.

Otherwise, what explanation can there be for the dozens of large spotlights above this sign, illuminating what is essentially a stretch of fallow ground?

This is the very type of overkill and wasteful illumination that is the cause of so much light pollution in our urban areas and blights the lives of many residents by depriving them of a good night's sleep.

There is certainly plenty of space behind the sign to accommodate solar panels or some hi-tech, non-polluting energy source. Not only are all these lights an unnecessary waste of energy, if we must draw attention to the lack of progress on the development of our so-called cultural hub, then why is this signage not a model of best practices? It should be an example of how advertising signs can be illuminated with the least impact on the surroundings and with a minimum expenditure of energy.

Surely, after all the billions that have been invested in Cyberport, the Science Park at Sha Tin and various technology funding schemes, an alternative could be found to this outdated, wasteful and ugly form of illumination.

Mary Melville, Tsim Sha Tsui

Co-operation is so important

I refer to the letter from Madeleine Onne, the new artistic director of the Hong Kong Ballet ('Ballet stars need an early start', August 18). I am glad that the ballet company is committed to working with the Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts to ensure that the city's dancing talent will have the best opportunity to reach its potential.

Close co-operation between the ballet company and the academy will present local dancers with an opportunity to have access at a young enough age to the intensive training that is required to qualify to be a principal ballerina.

I previously served on the boards of both the Academy for Performing Arts and the Hong Kong Ballet.

I would like to express my support for the joint efforts of these two artistic institutions to progressively move forward towards achieving an equivalent tradition of professional ballet training, as exists in Europe, the United States, Canada and Australia and, according to Ms Onne, is already in place on the mainland.

Hilton Cheong-Leen, To Kwa Wan

Rapid-response strategy lacking

I would like to thank C. T. Chu ('Is government well prepared?' August 18) for asking whether our government has contingency arrangements in place for dealing with natural disasters.

The disaster at Tai O in June last year, which cut off the town for days, revealed a response that was wanting in almost every respect. There was no effective co-ordination, inadequate prioritising of responses and a lack of awareness of responsibilities. Departments responded within their own remit in the absence of any effective overall control.

In July 1996, a fire on Pat Sin Leng killed three students and two teachers. The emergency services had no common wavelength with which to communicate, which led to wrong responses and contributed to the tragic outcome.

Now, 13 years later, there is still no common wavelength for the emergency services, and officers are obliged to use personal mobile phones. This is apparently due to inter-service rivalry over priority and funding issues.

These disasters reinforce what should be obvious to all of us who live in this first-world city. There should be a comprehensive disaster-response arrangement with a command centre and clearly defined lines of command and responsibility. Inter-departmental rivalries should not prevent cross-service communications and resource allocation. Responsibility has to be taken at a very senior level and the system periodically tested with realistic scenarios.

There was mention, after the Tai O fiasco, that Development Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor had set up a command-response arrangement that transcended departmental rivalries. It would be good to have an official response explaining what is in fact in place.

Clive Noffke, Lantau

Sacrificed on the altar of wealth

I refer to the reports about children from Shaanxi province suffering lead poisoning after living near a smelter.

This shows once again that, on the mainland, people's health is sacrificed for the sake of industrial development. What has happened is unacceptable and should be condemned.

The children and their parents must feel helpless. In a state where social welfare is almost non-existent, victims of such incidents face a miserable future. Officials and wealthy businessmen have been enjoying the benefits of the country's economic development at the expense of ordinary people.

Premier Wen Jiabao always calls for unity and harmony. However, the selfishness of the rich will only lead to conflict. The government must try to reduce the frequency of these disasters.

Leung Siu-fong, Chai Wan

Post