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

Q Should the Town Planning Board review the Central reclamation plan?

I refer to your report 'Planning secretary rejects new reclamation claims' (10 September). We are surprised that there should be any confusion in the minds of senior government officials, such as Permanent Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan,  about the process of government decision-making.

If our understanding is wrong, we would like the government to explain the process in detail.

Ms Lau says the government has no other reclamation plans in mind except for Wan Chai and southeast Kowloon. Our society recognises that the Town Planning Board  has removed the proposed reclamations from the relevant Outline Zoning Plans but that is not the point we are making.

The government has gazetted the proposed reclamations indicated in the  South China Morning Post supplement (7 September) under the Foreshores and Seabed (Reclamation) Ordinance.

That provides the government with the legal right to proceed with the reclamation at any time, irrespective of the board's position.

If the government is genuine in its intention not to proceed with these reclamations, then it should de-gazette these proposed reclamation areas.

In view of the various statements made by government officials in relation to not proceeding with the reclamations, the society cannot understand why they do not willingly and promptly take steps to completely remove these proposed reclamations so as to be consistent with both the promises they have made and the actions of the planning board.

Christine Loh, chairwoman, Society for Protection of the Harbour

On other matters...

I am absolutely disgusted with the so-called 'service' that I received from So-net broadband and Netvigator.

It seems that So-net has abandoned all its customers and any pretence at customer service just a matter of days after selling out to Netvigator.

On Friday  morning   I was not able to access my e-mail. I called the So-net hotline, which  had a recorded message telling me to call the Netvigator hotline. After pushing an eternity of buttons and listening to some automaton talk for aeons, I finally got through to technical support.

A woman  told me that the SMTP mail, accessed via Outlook Express, was inaccessible because the server was busy. I asked if using Web mail on the internet would work, and she said that part was maintained by So-net and should be accessible. After ending the call, I tried to access my e-mail through the Web, but there was a notice stating that the server was under maintenance for the day.

More than 12 hours later, when I returned home, I immediately tried to check my e-mail, but was denied access yet again. I called the Netvigator hotline again, and this time the story was different!

A man on the  phone told me that both the SMTP and the Web mail were maintained by So-net and was not their responsibility, and told me to call them instead.    Along with So-net and Netvigator not having their stories straight,  I was most upset after the man said that So-net users were entitled to a new Netvigator e-mail account. I thought I might use it, seeing as the So-net e-mail server was down, so the man guided me through the settings on my computer.

To my  disgust, as soon as I connected the Netvigator account there was a flood of 130 spam e-mails!

I immediately deleted that account as I have no confidence in the Netvigator system. I could not believe that there were 130 spam mails before I had even started to use the account, before I had even registered that e-mail with any online entities. The customer service man told me to go to the Netvigator website to activate some filtering functions - shouldn't this be done by the broadband provider rather than the customer? It seems Netvigator is intent on shirking its responsibilities.

What on earth is Netvigator doing? It very happily took over the So-net system, which was working well previously, and is very happily receiving our money, but it has failed to provide any semblance of customer service. I am severely disappointed that such a large company could do its job so poorly, and it definitely won't be long before I find an alternative broadband provider.

M. Cheung, Tseung Kwan O

We refer to the letter from Patrick Gilbert (South China Morning Post, September 8) regarding emissions from a KMB bus. As a responsible public transport provider,  Kowloon Motor Bus continually upgrades its bus fleet to ensure  it complies with  internationally recognised environment standards.

Besides running all buses on ultra-low-sulphur diesel since 2001, KMB has progressively upgraded its engines so that compared with emission levels in 1992, each KMB bus now emits 71 per cent less particulates on average.

This improvement has been achieved by the introduction of Euro standard engines, with all new purchased buses now operating at stringent Euro III standards.

Regarding Mr Gilbert's inquiry about the feasibility of powering the KMB double-deck fleet by means of electric-diesel hybrid or natural gas, these options have been studied but technical and operational constraints rule out their adoption at the present time.

If a passenger observes any KMB bus emitting excess smoke, they should note down the vehicle registration number and call the KMB Customer Service Hotline on 2745 4466 so that the necessary follow-up action may be taken.

Susanne Ho,  Kowloon Motor Bus spokeswoman



talk back