Ho Tung Gardens was listed as a grade-one historic building and given a one-year provisional monument status. But as we all know, it was owned by Ho Tung's granddaughter, who insisted on demolishing it. The government tried to negotiate with her, but in the end announced it would not declare the house a monument after all. This incident shows the lack of power officials have when dealing with private owners of historic buildings.

The government should be firmer. Once buildings have been listed as declared monuments, owners should no longer be able to change them.

In addition, the government should hire a company to estimate the value of the buildings so a reasonable amount of compensation can be offered to counter unreasonable claims.

More economic incentives should be offered to private owners, such as land exchanges and compensation.

Apart from introducing harsher rules, revitalisation is also a constructive way to help save historic buildings from demolition.

Revitalisation can preserve historic buildings and put them to interesting and innovative use. There are many successful examples such as the Blue House and Mei Ho House, a grade-two historic building, converted from a 1950s public housing estate, that was turned into a youth hostel.

Many historic buildings give us an insight into Hong Kong's unique past, which is characterised by a sophisticated fusion of Eastern and Western cultures.

These buildings are precious. The government must impose tougher rules to ensure their protection and we all have to learn to treasure and conserve our heritage for the benefit of future generations.

It occurs to me that there would be plenty of space to occupy Central with no discernible effect on businesses.

All police have to do is be sufficiently active and move all the cars and vans illegally parked (and double and even triple parked) outside Princes Building and other locations in Central and place the protesters in the space made vacant.

Hong Kong is facing a critical and difficult moment as organisers of the Occupy Central movement call for a mass protest in Central after the framework for the 2017 chief executive election was passed unanimously by the National People's Congress Standing Committee.

I oppose the Occupy Central campaign. The movement will create chaos and confrontation in our society, and undermine social order. Radical groups of protesters are often seen struggling with police, resulting in casualties.

The Occupy Central campaign organisers are not interested in engaging in peaceful dialogue with the central government. Civil disobedience will be used as a threat to force the NPC to accept their proposals.

To avoid causing tragedy, harming the economy and undermining social order, I appeal to Occupy Central campaign organisers and their supporters to end their campaign. Once it turns into a social movement, violent acts will disrupt social order and affect national security.

The leaders of the movement and their followers might even face prosecution.

Protesters should think twice before they act and consider whether or not their actions are reasonable.

It is wrong for students to boycott classes since those who want to attend classes will be affected. No remedial classes should be arranged for those who opt to boycott.

Confrontation could only worsen the matter and widen the differences. If pan-democrat lawmakers determine to veto the political reform proposal in the Legislative Council, Hong Kong will not enjoy universal suffrage. I am confident that the central government can shortlist the right chief executive hopefuls for the election.

This is because each of the in-line runways would need to be about 2,000 metres away from the other in order for them to be able to operate as two runways in the same direction as necessitated by wind conditions.

With such a system, we would definitely be talking about a westward encroachment into somebody else's airspace and into their north-south marine navigation channels, whether we are talking about extending the north or the south runway westwards.

As regards the third runway, by the time it is operational (restricted to landing only due to high ground to the east), the total capacity of the three runways will have been reached. We therefore must start planning for a fourth runway now. If there is no room for the fourth runway, we should be considering building a replacement airport where there is room for four runways and more.

If we think we can stop the Chek Lap Kok development at three runways, we should be asking ourselves why we can't stop at two.

The recent death of a dog on the MTR's East Rail Line has raised awareness of animal rights.

Although there are laws to protect animals from being maltreated, inadequacies can be found.

I understand that not everyone loves animals, but they can at least refrain from hurting them. People wanting pets can adopt animals from groups like the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, instead of buying from pet shops.

The government should introduce laws to ban experiments on animals. We have laws against racism and ageism, then why is there no law against animal testing?

Every creature has a right to live free from suffering. I hope people around the world can pay more attention to the issue of animal rights.