Jake van der Kamp proves that the arguments for the Central-Wan Chai bypass are invalid in his column 'Donald's best option: admit error and rethink capital spending plans' (February 26). The Third Comprehensive Transport Study, posted on the Transport Department's website, says the number of private cars on the road should be 38 per cent greater than it was at the end of 1997. 'The actual number,' writes van der Kamp, 'is 13 per cent'. The government's justification for the Central-Wan Chai bypass was that the number of private cars would increase by almost 40 per cent between 1997 and now - but these cars have not materialised. Yet the figure is still being used to justify destroying our harbour rather than introducing cheaper and more fair road congestion charging. We are hearing an election promise from Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen to build unnecessary infrastructure. This will increase the already heavy traffic in Central, Wan Chai and Causeway Bay by putting new developments on top of land reclaimed from the harbour. And all this was originally justified by ghost cars. ANNELISE CONNELL, Clear The Air Room to take off David Dodwell, chief executive of the aviation consultancy Strategic Access, believes the efficient use of air space is 'being hindered by the conservative air spacing regime in Hong Kong' and Beijing's 'refusal to allow planes bound for or leaving Hong Kong to fly through the mainland's air space below 10,000 feet'. In quoting this biased opinion without question in your story 'China Southern freighter expansion to lift Baiyun airport' (February 26), the reporter is clearly unaware that an independent computer simulation exercise in 1990 indicated that the maximum throughput at Chek Lap Kok airport would be 52 aircraft an hour, given the interdependent mode of runway operations necessitated by Hong Kong's terrain. This is fractionally lower than the 54 aircraft movements an hour being achieved today. So there is no truth in Mr Dodwell's claim that the regime is being unduly conservative. The same simulation exercise also showed that, if an independent mode of runway operations could be used, the maximum throughput would be 86 aircraft movements an hour. This is greater than the throughput achieved last year by London's Heathrow Airport, which does not have the terrain constraints that Hong Kong faces. To be able to advance to an independent mode of runway operations for Chek Lap Kok, we need two laterally separate flight paths serving the two runways. These two flight paths would need to be defined by onboard area-navigation equipment, instead of the current ground-based point-source navigation aids. As for the 10,000-foot restriction imposed on Hong Kong traffic entering or leaving mainland air space, it should be appreciated that the Shenzhen airport also needs manoeuvring airspace for its quite substantial traffic. PETER LOK, Chai Wan Singapore-style 'freedom' In her opinion piece 'So much for 'economic freedom'' (February 26), Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee writes that she 'would not be surprised' if Singapore clinched the No1 spot on the indices of world economic freedom, as awarded by The Fraser Institute and The Heritage Foundation. She notes that while these institutes evaluate all economies by the same criteria, Singaporean ministers are never shy to launch libel suits - and that, thanks to a lack of judicial independence, the government rarely loses a case. 'Maybe the Singapore model is one we should embrace,' she concludes. Could it be that Mrs Ip was aware before her article was published that the next page of the South China Morning Post would carry a major story, with photographs, of 'Hong Kong's toughest jail', the 70-year-old Stanley Prison ('Inside story', February 26)? Were we to embrace the Singapore way, I have little doubt Mrs Ip and her cronies would ensure a further 70 years for Stanley Prison as the long-term home for legislator 'Long Hair' Leung Kwok-hung and his ilk. A master's degree from Stanford University and a new job do not a democrat make. J. CHARLESTON, Tai Hang A long and lucky life Congratulations to Tai Po villager Chan Chi for living 107 years despite smoking for many decades ('Smoking, no sex - and still alive at 107', February 25). I admire his healthy, low-fat diet and regular dawn exercises. There is no doubt Mr Chan, described in your story as 'perhaps the oldest person in Hong Kong', also won the smokers' lottery. My dad did not win the smokers' lottery. Smoking aborted his life when he was 52. Tobacco made me fatherless at the age of 11. I hope that Mr Chan and the media will tell youngsters in Hong Kong and the mainland that smoking is very risky. MIKE SAWYER, Birmingham, Alabama Worse than the Oscars Watching this year's excruciatingly boring 'live' telecast of the Academy Awards was bad enough. But did TVB really have to make it even worse with its promotions for the upcoming series Ugly Betty and the Oscars' encore? Its advertisement for Ugly Betty showed that creativity is well and truly dead in Hong Kong, while its portrayal of the foreign domestic helper in its promotion for the Academy Awards rerun proved that racism and bad taste continue to thrive out here - a sad advertisement for Asia's 'world city'. Let's hope the domestic helper killed off that horrible tai tai and her family before they could catch the encore. HANS EBERT, Repulse Bay Open on Saturdays I refer to Barbara Yau's letter on public service office hours since the introduction of a five-day working week ('Please serve the public', February 20). I would like to clarify that the operating hours of all public-oriented counter services of the Immigration Department, including those handling Hong Kong travel documents, are open on Saturdays. Our headquarters in Wan Chai are open on this day from 9am to 12pm, while all our branch offices are open from 9am to 1pm. The public's demand for services on Saturdays was our primary concern when considering the implementation of a five-day week in the Immigration Department. This is why we decided to maintain the status quo for all our public-orientated services. As for Ms Yau's comment on the personal attendance required from applicants, this is indispensable because a passport is an important document. Under the existing arrangement, anyone who applies for a passport in person may collect it themselves at an office of their choice or provide written authorisation for a representative to collect it on their behalf. Applicants may also consider using the travel documents delivery service provided by Hongkong Post. Anyone who submits an application by post or via the drop-in box at any immigration office must collect their passport themselves. Given that Hong Kong passports are normally valid for five years for holders younger than 16 and for 10 years for holders aged 16 or older, we believe the above-mentioned application and collection channels should be adequate to serve the needs of the public. Y.C. CHAN, for the director of immigration Such bad judgment I write in reply to Meena Krishnan's letter yesterday suggesting that your correspondent A.L. Nanik, as an Indian 'guest of China', should refrain from advocating universal suffrage in Hong Kong ('Such bad manners', February 22). As an Indian myself, I am embarrassed that Ms Krishnan should question how democracy might improve 'the good life Mr Nanik has enjoyed here over the years'. India is the largest democracy in the world, and its people value their freedom to vote. Universal suffrage will allow the people of Hong Kong to choose their leaders on the basis of their performance. There is no better way to ensure government accountability. To add further fuel to the fire, Ms Krishnan 'trusts Beijing would have the good judgment to exclude non-Chinese from voting', should Hong Kong be granted universal suffrage. Well, I am angry at this assertion. Although I have a British passport, I was born in Hong Kong and consider it my home. This is where my heart lies. I am nobody's guest and I should have the right to vote. I don't wish to interfere in the governance of Hong Kong but I am sure that, when the time comes for universal suffrage, all permanent residents should be given this right, regardless of where they originally came from. AMIT SINGH, Sheung Wan
