bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

sponsorType

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

factSheets

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

copyrighted

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

The e-mail forum

Q Should Hong Kong people buy less?

Money should be spent in a reasonable way, but buying less is not the way to save natural resources.

All goods consume different kinds of resources. We cannot avoid buying what we need.  It is subjective to consider something as a wasteful purchase.

Encouraging people to restrict purchases is not the most effective way to reduce waste. Vast amounts of raw materials and fuel are wasted by factories and industrial plants. Personal consumption is relatively negligible. Using environmentally friendly products and reducing the use of plastic bags are more constructive methods to save our world.  Kenneth She, Tsing Yi

Q Is there room for compromise in the reclamation battle?

I think there is room for compromise but the government is unwilling to accept the truth due to a fear of losing face.

Despite protests from the public, the government still continues with the project. People criticised the government for trying to implement a plan before explaining it to them. This was the reason there was such great opposition from the public.

If they had held a meeting to discuss the project with the environmental protection groups, they could have come to an agreement to solve the problem. Since it is necessary to reclaim  land to relieve the pressure of traffic jams in Central, the government and the groups would have been forced to try to co-operate with each other in finding a suitable solution.

However, the government instead chose to make the decision by itself. And after facing such strong opposition, it would seem shameful to compromise - to do so would demonstrate that the government had made the wrong decisions. Chan Kong, Tsuen Wan The Central and Wan Chai reclamations have drawn great attention from the public and environmental sectors. Filling in the harbour is not a wise way to solve the traffic problems in Central.

Sadly, the government signed the contracts for the reclamation project without thorough consideration.  Now, some activists are keen on seeking ways to reduce the reclaimed area without breaking the contract. Some of them even work as volunteers and send proposals to the government.

Many professionals and environmental activists have joined hands to work for a better Hong Kong and I am deeply impressed by their deeds. There must surely be room for compromise.

The government has no reason to snub their proposals. If the government officials think there are problems in the proposals, they can co-operate with the activists to find out the best solutions. This is the most cost-effective way to solve the conflict.

We should be thankful Hong Kong has so many caring citizens. Simon Lee, Tsuen Wan

On other matters ...

I would like to respond to the article by Albert Cheng on November 24 concerning the Office of the Telecommunications Authority's regulation of the telecommunications industry.

The article has failed to recognise the benefits that Type II interconnection policy has brought, and is still bringing, to consumers.

The Type II interconnection policy has effectively facilitated the development of competition in the fixed network market, lowered prices and widened choice. As at the end of August, through Type II interconnection, 58 per cent of residential households had the choice of at least one alternative telephone service supplier. And 43 per cent of the consumers who have decided to choose the services of PCCW's competitors are served through Type II interconnection.

That new operators roll out their customer access networks 'only in certain areas while leaving districts that are more costly to develop to PCCW' has nothing to do with the Type II interconnection policy.

Where to roll out is a commercial decision of the operators.

Abolishing Type II interconnection would not force the operators to roll out the networks to unprofitable areas. PCCW has a universal service obligation to cover the unprofitable areas. The cost of meeting this obligation is equitably shared by all relevant operators.

It is misleading to refer to the services of the operators offering services through Type II interconnection as mere 'rebranding' of PCCW's service. Type II interconnection only provides the 'last mile' - the copper wire connecting the customer to the nearest exchange. The network operator needs to invest in and build the core network and switches to provide the services to customers. These operators are not simply reselling PCCW's service.

The claim in the article that PCCW 'is forced to provide Type II interconnection to its rivals at below cost prices' is baseless. This has never been the intention of the policy.

The interconnection charge received by PCCW covers all relevant capital, operating and maintenance costs, including a fair cost of capital, represents a fair compensation to the owner of the local loops and constitutes a revenue stream to PCCW in addition to revenue from retail services.

Type II interconnection has proven successful in facilitating liberalisation of the telecommunications market. Nonetheless, as a regulator who should always respond to the rapidly-changing market landscape, we are now taking an initiative to conduct a comprehensive review of the Type II interconnection policy.

We hope to issue the second consultation paper to put forth our preliminary views for public discussion before the end of this year. The consultation will be conducted in the most thorough and transparent manner before deciding our way ahead.  M.H. Au, Director-General of Telecommunications



talkback