• Mon
  • Sep 15, 2014
  • Updated: 10:59am
PUBLISHED : Sunday, 08 September, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Sunday, 08 September, 2013, 1:52am

Government should stop coddling private road users

Philip Bowring says that a government flush with funds from land sales should nevertheless find better use for its billions than building roads that exacerbate jams and pollution

BIO

Philip Bowring has been based in Asia for 39 years writing on regional financial and political issues. He has been a columnist for the South China Morning Post since the mid-1990s and for the International Herald Tribune from 1992 to 2011. He also contributes regularly to the Wall Street Journal, www.asiasentinel.com, a website of which he is a founder, and elsewhere. Prior to 1992 he was with the weekly Far Eastern Economic Review, latterly as editor.
 

It has been said that the definition of a developed country is one where rich people take public transport. That certainly applies to most but the mega rich in places such as downtown Tokyo, New York and London. So those thinking about poverty issues in Hong Kong would do well to ask why so many people drive to work in this most dense of cities. That I am a car-driving beneficiary of the system here does not make me an admirer of it.

Top of the list of those who are only moderately well off but drive to free or low-cost parking spots near their work are civil servants. I do not have a count of the number of spaces available to them in prime locations but the assumption that driving to work is normal permeates many policies here, to the detriment of the vast majority who must use public transport.

Central is overprovided with parking spaces. Spaces there should be scarce and very expensive but they are not - in the Sydney central business district, cost averages HK$100 an hour and can go up to HK$150, compared with a maximum HK$30 here.

The colonial government's retreat from road pricing nearly 30 years ago in the face of taxi protests should have led to other means of limiting car usage. But, instead, the bureaucracy has pandered to minority interests by, for example, failing to raise the central Cross-Harbour Tunnel toll, thereby exacerbating congestion and pollution. Instead of discouraging car usage, it is now wasting HK$28 billion on the Wan Chai-Central bypass, a project whose logic can only be explained by reference to a bureaucracy that inhabits the numerous centrally located offices of the government and its offshoots.

Official attitudes of providing for the rich at the expense of the majority are further illustrated by the deliberate failure of the police to crack down on illegal parking of limousines in areas such as Central. How can the police make such a fuss about the possible Occupy Central movement when they have such contempt for the law they are supposed to enforce? How can Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying say he is focusing on poverty when the rich are given a free pass to park as they wish?

Instead of learning from these mistakes, or from cities in the van of urban planning, the government is now planning, and in some cases already building, a vast system of highways and spaghetti junctions for east Kowloon and the Kai Tak area as though it were trying to follow 1960s Los Angeles.

Road space is grossly underpriced in Hong Kong at a time when housing is grossly overpriced. There is a connection between such mispricing by a government which controls land supply. Proper road pricing would not only reduce the need for more new roads but would speed up the buses and mini-buses used by the majority.

Hong Kong generally has a very good public transport system, which is why more people should be required to use it by pricing private road use appropriately and not building unneeded roads with money extracted from land sales. Capital revenue can only be used for capital works. The higher the land price, the more the middle- and lower-income groups are squeezed and the more money the bureaucrats and their friends in the construction industry have to waste.

The government seems to prefer grandiose schemes of new roads to the minor improvements - a road or pedestrian overpass here, a bus bay there - that would improve traffic flow at a fraction of the cost.

As it is, the current expansion of MTR lines is long overdue while funds which might have gone on other new lines or on public housing sports and other facilities are being thrown down the drain of the high-speed rail to Shenzhen and the (motor traffic only) bridge to Zhuhai and Macau. Providing yet more space for vehicles is even more damaging to public health, given the miserable efforts to impose, let alone implement, meaningful emission controls for vehicles and local vessels.

The diversion of funds to unneeded projects in part explains why, after years of wringing its hands over cage homes and illegal and unsanitary subdivisions, huge numbers still live in these appalling conditions, unable to afford more, yet unable to get public housing. It explains why illegal subdivisions are tolerated - partly because they are owned by influential people and partly because the tenants have no alternative. No wonder slum landlordism is an attractive investment for civil servants.

Personally, I am not in favour of rent controls. But it should never be forgotten that Hong Kong had them for many years as the colonial government sought to respond to public outrage at landlord behaviour, at a time of immense housing shortages following the refugee influxes of the 1960s, by limiting annual increases. The controls were phased out in 1998.

The overall housing supply situation is now far from dire. However, diversion of Hong Kong's income from housing and public transport to wasteful infrastructure and fiscal reserves has contributed to the current housing problems and exacerbated inequality. Unfortunately, there is scant sign that blinkered, job-for-life civil servants recognise the issue.

Philip Bowring is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator

Share

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

14

This article is now closed to comments

superdx
No amount of pricing increase will deter the rich from driving. Because they're rich. The police need to be more aggressive with the "waiting chauffeurs" and not only ticket them, but block the vehicle from escaping and then tow the offender away. It's amazing how chauffeurs can just park on double yellow/white lines and just inch away without even a ticket.
Pricing increases will also hurt many trucks and delivery services which rely on cheap transport to get their goods to shops and destinations. This is also a good thing because it's these ancient vehicles that cause the majority of the roadside pollution.
caractacus
All pretty much on the nail Philip.
Our Transport Department contains little talent and less imagination. If they were to bother learning from cities in the van of urban planning they would realise that more and bigger roads only leads to more vehicles and worse traffic congestion. There is another angle, in the rural Sai Kung peninsula for example, Highways Department appears to have already decided, after a totally fake and cosmetic "public consultation" which in fact consisted of listening to the greedy gangsters of the Heung Yee **** and large developers, to build dual carriageways to facilitate the commercial rape of the area. So, it isn't only skewed policies that are the problem, it is decision making perverted and corrupted behind a veil of legality by influence peddling tycoons and collusion in high circles of government.
daily
You know what will solve the Central traffic congestion?..........ban all cars from being driven by chaffeurs and force the rich boys and girls to drive the cars themselves.............that will keep all those cars away from Central.
chaz_hen
Then you've upped the accident and crash rates 300%! The richies are utter idiots behind the wheel!!
John Adams
YES!
And a VERY large number of the chauffeurs are actually male domestic helpers whose contract does not allow them to drive cars
impala
Look, that is all very sensible Mr Bowring. But hey, we only pay the Chief Executive a salary of HKD 400k per month. And each of the secretaries HKD 330k a month.

I mean, that is only about 1.2~1.5 times what the president of the USA (HKD 260k a month) earns, and what does that Obama fellow really have to show for after five years in the job huh? Passed a universal healthcare law, ended two wars, managed the aftermath of a major financial crisis, couple of natural disasters, terrorism and so on. That's all.

So really, you want our Hong Kong leaders to tackle something as complicated as road pricing? Before you know it, you will begin to demand that they also address the waste problem. Or even do something about housing. And that for those paltry salaries. Pah!
jim_seymour
Even on supposedly vehicle-free Lamma Island, "village vehicles" can be a pain in the neck - tearing down walkways, endangering pedestrians and pets. Hong Kong needs more vehicle-free walkway space.
johndoe
Good points in this article. I have seen and experienced these kind of traffic jams numerous time travelling on buses and in taxis. There is a huge lack of law enforcement from the Hong Kong police, alternatively the law is not well written. Taking up valuable road space at a meaningless cost is a non issue if you earn hundreds of thousands a month. There has to be consequences for those who violate the law, like revocation of driver license after repeated offenses.
pbhawk
well said Philip
kimhkwong
Sadly, the super-rich still will not spend $30 an hour at the parking station. They send their drivers to park wherever they can. These cars park on the roadside slow down traffic, preventing buses pulling in to bus stops, not to mention idling engine. Police frequently turn a blind eye on these cars unless they receive complaints. I have been once told by police that they were traffic police, they do not give infringement notice.

Pages

 
 
 
 
 

Login

SCMP.com Account

or