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 Are there any circumstances under which you would be happy to get junk calls  on your mobile?

After reading your article on junk calls to mobile phones and faxes, I'm relieved to see that finally there seems to be some serious complaints about it. This drives us crazy!

Like the Australian businessman in the article, we frequently travel and receive calls and messages on our mobile phones in the middle of the night. Even when in Hong Kong, we receive them at all hours of the night, which continually disturbs our household. Our fax machine continually spits out faxes day and night and you can't call the companies as none of them speak English - which is the same case with the mobile phone calls. To top it all off, we are paying for these extremely annoying calls.

So in answer to your question: no, there are no circumstances under which we would be happy to get junk calls on our mobile phones or fax machine.

Lisa Swanson and Brent Bell, Repulse Bay

Q Should the government stop serving shark's fin soup at official banquets?

I would like to congratulate the University of Hong Kong on its decision to ban shark's fin from all its functions.

It sets an example that one can only hope will spur others to do likewise and, perhaps more importantly, raise awareness of the cruelty and  waste inherent in serving this banquet favourite. Commercial shark-finning is fuelled by demand and if the wide diversity of shark species is to be preserved it is critical that this demand is reduced.

The government's stance of looking for  'community consensus' before acting to ban the dish is indefensible in the light of Hong Kong's supposed commitment to sustainable development and support for environmental conservation.

Agreeing to international treaty restrictions on three endangered species is far from sufficient, given that 58 species are listed as vulnerable, endangered or critical on The World Conservation Union  Red List (www.redlist.org).

Hong Kong is the world's shark's fin trading centre and people here are estimated to consume some 1,400 tonnes of shark's fin per year.

This puts our government in a position to make a powerful contribution to the global status of sharks that goes beyond the minimum - it's called leadership. This should include education of the community about the true cost of the finning industry, but it should start with an unequivocal stance on the banning of the dish from all official functions, in order to set a responsible example and generate some debate.

The argument by the spokesman for the secretary for environment, transport and works that the dish must be served at official banquets out of respect for the wishes of certain guests is administrative cowardice. A guest worthy of respect will respect the beliefs and values of their host.

Bruce Stephens, Lantau

On other matters ...

It's very sad to read that a cycle race in Hong Kong suffered a fatality on Sunday. Let's hope that out of this tragedy, major changes take place to improve safety and minimise accidents in the future.

Ideally, roads should be closed for races. If not possible, traffic needs to be 'escorted' in a convoy with an official car and/or police at the front of the convoy to prevent overtaking.

The choice of route for this cycling race was questionable. A better route would have been to also use the 10km paved road from Pak Tam Chung to the High Island Reservoir dam, which is currently closed to cyclists.

This should be opened and could be made secure for races with little or no disruption to traffic.

A  loop from Pak Tam Chung to above Ham Tin village would add an additional 8km. This course for cyclists would follow the identical route on which the AVOHK China Coast Marathon and Community Chest 5km race are staged.

Cycle races or triathlons with cycling sections on roads need to be completed earlier. Traffic builds up after 9.30am and therefore this would seem a logical cut-off time for bikes to be off the roads.

The Hong Kong Cycling Association and Hong Kong Triathlon Association should jointly agree on a safety policy for races. They should also share the cost of  signs to alert drivers to  races in progress.

The wearing of cycling helmets and the use of lights at night should be mandatory, just like wearing of seat belts while travelling in a car.

The task of minimising accidents and making races safer for the growing number of cyclists across the territory lies with the cycling community to take the initiative and for the relevant authorities to support it. Don't expect minibus drivers to change their behaviour.

Guy Horne, Repulse Bay

As a philosophy graduate of the University of Hong Kong, I was astonished by the press release about the administrative restructuring of the arts faculty on October 26.

The philosophy department is to be placed under the school of humanities with the fine art, history and music departments.

The press release claims that the five-school model groupings were accepted by 'an overwhelming majority of the faculty board members' and has nothing to do with cutting teaching programmes and staff.

I am not convinced by these representations.

Members on the faculty board are departmental staff. Is representation proportionate to the size of the department? If yes, I am not surprised that it has been approved by 'an overwhelming majority of the faculty board members' since, according to the proposal, big departments are  not really affected. They even become a school on their own (Chinese, geography and Japanese studies).

So, is the restructuring a result of thorough negotiations or tyranny of the majority?

How will the philosophy department share resources with other departments in the school of humanities?

If no one is going to lose his/her job, how can the proposal simplify administration and save money? When several departments are grouped into one school,  there will be duplication of positions, from executive officers to clerical and technical staff. What will the university do to these duplicated posts in order to simplify administration?

While the university is determined to restructure the 93-year-old arts faculty, the position of the dean has been 'vacant' for a couple of years.

Instead of appointing a dean from within the faculty to lead the restructuring effort, the university has appointed  John Malpas, pro-vice-chancellor and chair professor in earth science, to be acting dean of arts.

The new dean will only take office this month, after the faculty board made its momentous decision on October 10. According to the press release, the new dean has been involved in the planning of the restructuring for but a few months.

Why did the university appoint someone from above to be acting dean for such a long period when the faculty was through the planning of restructuring?

I am eager to hear the university's justifications.

We may be a small department, but we are a great one too - being the department that studies metaphysics, morality, existence, the mind, the truth.

The philosophy department deserves due respect from the university administration.

Silvia Yuen, Pokfulam



Talkback