bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

sponsorType

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

Q Should police step up enforcement of seat belts on minibuses?

How long are we prepared to let our friends and families die in minibus crashes? How long will we continue to blame the victims of these crashes for their  deaths?

These past few weeks I have read about the deaths of innocent people at the hands of  minibus drivers. Drivers who drive recklessly, break the law, kill our friends and families and then walk  away without being convicted.

Meanwhile,  passengers are blamed for their own deaths because they did not wear a seat belt, or  were riding their bikes during an organised cycling race. Are the minibus drivers a protected species?

Why are they not thrown in jail or at least charged with manslaughter  as they would in any other  advanced  community.

In the 'Tomorrow's questions' section of the Post,  rather than see the usual  questions like 'Should cyclists be banned from racing on the road?' or 'Should the elderly be strapped in to the seat of a mobile death trap (so they have no way of getting up and reprimanding the driver when he drives like a maniac?)', I would like to see: 'When will the minibus drivers of Hong Kong stop murdering our citizens?'

David Cain, Central

In the space of seven days, there have been three fatalities and more than 20 people seriously injured at the hands of  minibus drivers.

All three drivers involved undertook reckless manoeuvres and your newspaper asks, unbelievably, whether police should step up enforcement of the wearing of seat belts.

Sure, seat belts would help but let's stop beating about  the bush and point out the real culprits, shall we. These and other accidents too numerous to mention are due to the woeful standard of our minibus drivers who are mostly gruff, inconsiderate and oblivious of passenger comfort and safety.

The other day, I took a minibus to Tai Po and the driver frequently exceeded the limit, ignoring the insistent beeping of the device registering 78km/h  and even making a call on his mobile phone.

This sort of conduct is by no means unusual and is often complemented by a failure to ensure passengers have safely taken their seats (let alone buckled up) before accelerating away and stopping at least a car's length over the white line at traffic lights.

Most passengers are too scared to remonstrate with the driver but those who do voice their dissatisfaction receive  a mouthful of abuse. Besides, safety belts are as good as useless if the drivers insist on suicidal overtaking or racing each other.

The questions you should be asking are when will the police clamp down on these appalling drivers and what sort of standards, if any, do minibus companies demand of their drivers? And why does the government allow a ridiculous system of renting out minibuses for the day which absolutely guarantees that drivers will race to cram in as many fares as possible? Safety is the very last thing on these drivers' minds.

Bus drivers often refer to the unpleasant and stressful traffic conditions in Hong Kong but this is no excuse for dangerous driving or  disregard for passenger safety.

You want a definition of 'stressful', try speaking to the drivers of London's red buses in the wake of this summer's terrorist attacks. Then marvel at their sangfroid as they continue plying their daily routes without any compromise in the service they perform.

Debbie Barnes, The Peak

Notwithstanding the practical problems of enforcing the use of seat belts on minibuses (on approaching any police checkpoint the bus driver will tell all the passengers to quickly fasten their seat belts before the police board the bus), the recent spate of fatal minibus accidents begs the question: 'Should the police step up enforcement of safe and legal minibus driving?'

Perhaps police officers travelling on the minibuses in plain clothes from time-to-time would focus the minds of drivers and passengers alike on safety and abiding by the law.

Name and address supplied

Q Which of the three Nathan Road concepts is the best?

Your article, 'Bus-only Nathan Road may not ride' (November 8), suggests that the Transport Department never had any serious intention of introducing a bus-only section on Nathan Road thereby reducing pedestrian deaths and injuries caused by speeding vehicles.

Without even waiting for the results of the only just launched online public consultation exercise, we hear a deputy commissioner for transport confiding to  politicians of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong that the plan will probably be dropped 'because of public opposition'. How does the commissioner know this before the consultation is finished?

The Transport Department is as usual surrendering to pressure from commercial drivers' organisations wishing to preserve their vested interests. This department also only holds direct consultations with district councils and other political parties, almost all of whose members are relatively wealthy and own and drive private cars.

It is the non vehicle-owning pedestrians who suffer this road carnage but no widespread consultation mechanism exists for consulting these people, who represent the majority.

Why doesn't the commissioner set up booths along Nathan Road's pavements and ask for feedback from the hundreds of thousands of pedestrians who risk their lives each day trying to cross Nathan Road?

Second, why doesn't the commissioner of police direct his traffic branch to position speed-enforcement units on Nathan Road between Waterloo and Mongkok roads? It is common to see vehicles (buses included) reaching speeds in excess of 70km/h on this stretch of road.

It is time for pedestrians to be given a fairer deal. Even the courts are negligent on this aspect: only three months' imprisonment for  knocking down and killing a pedestrian, the same penalty imposed for merely helping a person to evade paying to watch a  movie on the internet.

Would somebody at the top please remind the administration and the judiciary that pedestrians are human beings as well as vehicle owners and drivers.

P. A. Crush, Sha Tin

On other matters ...

One characteristic of Hong Kong is its limited space. When this city was developed,  city planners never thought some crazy villagers would cycle all the way from one remote spot to another just for fun or for exercise.  Cycling as a sports activity doesn't have a long history in Hong Kong.

Cycling used to be for people working for grocery stores delivering heavy goods such as rice, kerosene and later gas to people living in the old districts such as Shamshuipo.

It is still a very favoured means of transport for people living in the New Territories whose abode is not within walking distance to the light rail or train stations. You can see bicycles parked every morning near these stations.

You can also see bicycle paths in  Yuen Long and Tai Po, places where residents  cycle a great deal. As for mountain or dirt-biking, there are, though few, designated areas where cyclists can take their bikes there to have fun during their holidays.

So, can one criticise  the government for not doing enough to guarantee the safety of cyclists. I am sure the government has definitely given a lot of thought to protecting the cyclists and is not discriminating against them.

However, as traffic is getting more dense and our city more polluted, a move to respond to the greening of our city should be an appropriate step. Allowing non-polluting vehicles such as bicycles and electric vehicles   is one such step. But I don't think the government has any intention of doing so.   I can smell the petrol and diesel fumes from  my 12th-floor bedroom. I know the government has business and commerce in mind, and time and speed in travelling means money. But can it start to think of its citizens' health now? Can the people living on The Peak start thinking of those living down below? Can they make commuting fun and living in the city a pleasure.

I really enjoy the cool fresh air in the city centres of Singapore and Malaysia and most European cities where governments have the determination to keep the air clean for their citizens.

I really hope our government  can green the city.

Zachary Ng Kwok-keung, Mei Foo

I do not know if I should thank Cable TV or ask them for a programming job. But either way we are delighted to have the second leg of the Australia-Uruguay World Cup soccer playoff being shown live, at 5pm tomorrow.

It is a shame customers must write to the editor to get some common sense from Cable TV. I look forward to turning down their imminent job offer.

Stephen Anderson, Wan Chai



talk back