Lai See
Readers rally as more tales of illegal parking hit the roads
We seem to have struck a chord with our piece yesterday on traffic violators and have had a number of responses.
People seem particularly irked by the illegal parking outside the Prince's Building. Other areas in Central we haven't mentioned previously include the stretch of road between the Prince's Building and the former Legislative Council building and the lay-by next to the Zoological and Botanical Gardens. Glenealy which leads into Ice House Street is 'a constant nightmare', we are told.
A reader observes: 'Since you raised the issue a couple of days ago, there has been no improvement. Police and traffic wardens are nowhere near these spots.'
Another says there is illegal parking around the back of Three Pacific Place, as well as Kennedy Road, from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs all the way to the intersection with Cotton Tree Drive from 4pm onwards.
There are cars constantly parked in lay-bys outside the Hopewell Centre and Wu Chung House on Queen's Road East, despite signs that clearly say 'vehicles will be prosecuted for waiting'.
Finance Street around the Four Seasons Hotel is another favourite free parking spot for Hong Kong's elite.
We also have had a letter advising us of illegal parking of a different sort. If you drive along Nam Fung Road between Repulse Bay Road and Wong Chuk Hang Road after 10pm you will see parked double-decker buses - 29 at the last count - which remain there until dawn.
Finally a reader tells us that the stretch of Gloucester Road running from Harcourt House to the Mass Mutual Tower is a favourite spot for idling engines, sleeping chauffeurs and double parking. 'Given that it is within spitting distance of Arsenal Street and the main police headquarters, it is amazing that no one notices. This stretch of road accommodates about 15 idling cars daily from early morning till late evening.'
Over to you, Commissioner of Police.
Calendar conundrum
Over at Orient Overseas Container Line, the container shipping line owned by the family of former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa, 2012 is not looking so good. It has encountered difficulties with its 2012 wall and desk calendars.
Our moles report that thousands of sets of calendars suffered mistakes in the spelling of 'professionalism' and 'excellence'. We hear stickers were hastily produced on the instructions of Stephen Ng Siu-kow, OOCL director of corporate planning, to cover up the embarrassing errors.
But that's not all. We are also told the 2012 calendar for OOCL Logistics was attacked by gremlins after the map of Europe, the Mediterranean and the Middle East region was transposed resulting in the mis-location of these regions.
OOCL says it decided to allow distribution of the logistics calendar in view of the cost, the timeliness and a reluctance to adopt a somewhat environmentally unfriendly option.
It says it will put in place a process to ensure it never happens again. These calendars now may well have novelty appeal - but it surely can't be good marketing. Clients will be gazing at this blunder every day for the next year.
Murray sets the record straight
Browsing entrepreneur David Tang Wing-cheung's website, icorrect.com, we came across an entry by Simon Murray, former boss of Hutchison Whampoa and now chairman of Glencore International, among other jobs.
The site provides a service for those who feel they have been wronged - usually in the press - and gives them a platform to give their side of the story.
In this case Murray is concerned about the way his comments about employing women were reported in Britain's The Sunday Telegraph.
It will be recalled that his recent views caused an uproar.
The newspaper quoted him saying: 'Do you think that means that when I rush out, what I'm absolutely desperate to have is young women who are about to get married in my company, and that I really need them on board because I know they're going to get pregnant and they're going to go off for nine months?'
Murray's 'correction' reads: 'I have never objected to women being executives in companies. In all my life, I have been a champion of meritocracy. Any suggestion to the contrary was completely taken out of context of the interview I gave, in which I referred to women only in the context of the exiting [sic] laws governing maternity leave.'
Quite so Simon.