bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

sponsorType

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

We should keep landmark of shame

It saddened me to hear the views of Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor as she defended the government's determination to demolish Queen's Pier at an open forum on Sunday, July 29.

Irrespective of its aesthetic appearance, the pier represented the beginning and end of a sad chapter in the  5,000-year-old history of China and its civilisation.

This chapter began when Hong Kong was colonised through Britain's gunboat diplomacy in 1841.

The pier was a landmark of shame that should  be preserved and then repackaged as a tourist attraction and as a place where members of the public could unwind.

At Sunday's forum, Mrs Lam was challenged by someone who said the government should have sought the approval of Beijing to destroy such an important monument.

On another matter at the forum, Mrs Lam said the government had been flexible with the West Kowloon Cultural District project, but I am sceptical about such a claim.

It is known that as part of phase one of the Chek Lap Kok and western tunnel infrastructure development, the cultural district site was originally designated for open parkland.

How can the government now say the public is in favour of a commercial and high-rise residential block development sprinkled with some 'cultural facilities'?

Officials know that a survey conducted in late 2005 revealed that more than 80 per cent of people preferred a  cultural green park.

The government should conduct another independent survey regarding the West Kowloon Cultural District.

It should find out what people want - a  'cultural green park' or a 'mixed commercial/residential development and some cultural facilities' - before it gives a surprise in September.

Peter Lee, Hong Kong Alternatives

TVB did not break the rules

Your reader Geoffrey Somers claimed there was a frequent infusion of commercials during the screening on TVB Pearl of the film Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone  ('Unimpressed by TVB's 'magic' ', July 28).

He asked if  the amount of advertising and promotional materials broadcast exceeded permissible limits.

TVB's  programmes are subject to regulation under the Broadcasting Ordinance (Cap 52) and the  codes of practice issued by the Broadcasting Authority.  The authority is the statutory body established for the regulation of broadcasting in Hong Kong.

It performs its function through its executive arm, the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority.

On advertising,  the ordinance stipulates that the aggregate advertising time of a free domestic television programme service shall not exceed 10 minutes per  hour from  5pm to 11pm every day, and at other times the aggregate advertising time shall not exceed 18 per cent of the total time the service is provided in that period.

Although there is no restriction on the amount of promotional materials for a programme, the viewers' interest is safeguarded by the minimum programme segment duration requirement in the codes of practice,  providing that the minimum duration of each programme segment of a feature film broadcast on a free domestic television programme service should not be less than seven minutes.

The Harry Potter film concerned was broadcast from 9.34pm on July 22  until 12.45am.

Our investigation revealed that it was broadcast in 13 programme segments lasting from 10 minutes 21 seconds to 13 minutes 23 seconds. The amount of advertising time between 9pm and 10pm and 10pm and 11pm did not exceed the prescribed 10 minutes per  hour.  The aggregate advertising time at other times did not exceed the prescribed 18 per cent of the total time of the service in that period. TVB was not in breach of the relevant regulatory requirements.

Chu Kar-lai, for Commissioner for Television and Entertainment Licensing

No need for judges to stay on

I appeal to the relevant officials in the government: Please do not extend the retirement age of our judges.

Laws, precedence, rules and regulations are not supposed to be bent for  personal reasons such as age.

In the past decade we have seen too many rulings which were contrary to the interests of Hong Kong and public opinion.

When such rulings are made, they do not improve the image of our courts, nor our confidence in them.

Wong Ho, Ho Man Tin

Fuel price hikes unfair to us all

The  price-fixing fine imposed on British Airways for  'discussing fuel surcharges with . . . Virgin Atlantic Airways' ('In brief', August 2) raises interesting questions.

Virgin as the whistleblower escaped the fines, while other airlines which simply followed the 'lead' of BA and Virgin will not be punished.

However, these companies obviously made handsome profits from hiking fuel charges.  There is no transparency or accountability justifying the huge hikes. The travelling public is simply a hostage to unchecked corporate greed.

The public deserves to know whether these surcharges are fair and reasonable.

Most of us will feel  we have been cheated by all the airlines which imposed comparable fuel surcharges in line with their competitors.

Would  the airlines operating in Hong Kong provide a response to this observation?

Joyce Wong, Central

False promises

I refer to the letter from the Urban Renewal Authority ('Project does not threaten wet market', July 26).

Those hundreds of residents from Peel Street and Graham Street, in Central, who have repeatedly petitioned the government for early implementation of works to improve their living conditions are not aware of the authority's track record.

The residents of these streets may think that  it will be like a reality show on property makeover, and the authority will tear down their old apartments and in return give them dream homes and shops at no extra charge.

However, if they are aware of the authority's history and exploits with regard to previous projects, I think this would remove their misconceptions.

Nalini Daswani, Tsim Sha Tsui

Out of touch

Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York, has been castigated  for taking public transport only twice a week and driving to get there. London's mayor Ken Livingstone takes public transport every day.

It is interesting to contrast their  approach to taking public transport with that of senior government officials in Hong Kong, who never seem to take public transport of any sort.

If they did, perhaps people would start to think that they were serious in their intentions to listen to the public.

As it is, the regular display of the convictions of those in power in London and New York demonstrates powerfully their leadership qualities far more than the defensive, remote and arrogant face that our leaders project upon us common folk in Hong Kong.

Tim Woodward, Kwai Chung



Beijing says Philippines is polluting South China Sea by burning waste

South China Sea: Asean, Beijing need recalibrated approach to reach binding code of conduct

Exercise by China’s PLA Navy sends timely reminder

How Chinese PLA’s latest forays off Australia cap years of maritime tensions

South China Sea

Letters