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

Defending police press query policy
I refer to the report ('Police play down memo on press queries', November 20). 
 Recently, the Hong Kong Police Force has  received negative publicity because of the way it discloses sensitive case information to the public. 
While I  agree that citizens' interests should be the  main priority when considering what information is to be publicised, I have reservations about the comments that were made  Mak Yin-ting,  chairwoman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, who said that the 'government, including the police force, should delegate power to subject officers, who know the most details of the subject matter'. 
 The subject officers having hands-on experience in dealing with the cases may be the ones who know  more about the details, but are they in the most suitable position to assess what information should or should not be released to the community?
 I believe senior management or the specialists in the public relations branch are in a better position to assess the big picture.  
 The approach of informing and seeking approval from senior officers before responding to press queries is not only adopted by government bodies but also  by other organisations,  because this is the  sensible and reasonable thing to do.
 There is definitely room for improvement when it comes  to communication between the police and the press  and the provision of timely information on cases where public safety is threatened. However, I do not think it is fair to criticise the current practice of the police.  
 To put the responsibility  for disclosing critical information in the wrong hands might further jeopardise public safety, instead of safeguarding it.
Li Yan-yee, Lam Tin
Government Hill project destructive
 It is amazing how we can all get schmoozed by  Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor. She's such a nice lady after all. But we really must read the words and not be  misled by sound bites. 
When she announced that the Central government offices redevelopment  would be reduced in size, many breathed a sigh of relief and thought, 'Well that's all right then, we can still keep that lovely open space on the old hill.' Well, no actually you can't. Mrs Lam's plans made only a tiny reduction to the original intentions and what remains is still massive, destructive and environmentally irresponsible. That nice old hill will disappear. 
This development is like an iceberg. What you see above does not reveal what is planned below. Even with the area reduced, one third of it is inside the hill.
 While the tower - at 32 floors smallish by Hong Kong standards  - will need a ground area of little more than 10,000 square feet, the 'reduced' spaces defined by Mrs Lam underneath it will require three times that footprint. 
The 'bit inside the hill' is going to be almost as big as the Landmark mall in Central. And don't imagine this is going to be neatly tunnelled out of the natural rock. Mrs Lam's intention is to blast and scour half of Government Hill from Lower Albert Road to Battery Path and five floors deep, as low as Queen's Road. 
That is a very big hole, which will be filled with a concrete building and then have a few 'environmental' planters scattered on top as public open space.  
Almost two million cubic feet of history is to be hacked out and disposed of by thousands of trucks, to be replaced by another anonymous tower and a half-submerged maze of windowless spaces pretending to be an environmental building solution. What we will have on top will be a copy of the landscaping around Pacific Place  One and Two.  
Whatever the ultimate use of any building on this site, the removal of the hill to create a base for it and the destruction of the ground that contains so much of our community history is out of line with international standards of environment, architecture and heritage preservation. 
The Antiquities Advisory Board has agreed to review the Government Hill site as a single entity with historic value - it's time Carrie Lam did the same. 
John Bowden, chairman, Save Our Shorelines
Offer advice to vulnerable tourists
I think some ridiculous tactics are employed in Hong Kong which can discourage people from visiting the city. 
Forced purchasing, for example, of souvenirs from shops is unacceptable.  
It is possible to counteract these kinds of unethical sales tactics by offering advice to people planning to visit Hong Kong.
They should be advised to sign up for an organised trip only with a reputable tour agency.
If they do this they are unlikely to be harassed by the guides or put under pressure to go into shops and buy items they do not want.  
 If necessary the government should consider introducing legislation to make more shops join the Quality Tourism Services scheme. 
It creates a good impression with visitors when they visit a retailer that has been given accreditation under the scheme.  
Also, it is important that travel agencies should employ suitably qualified guides. 
The government can help by setting up workshops which enable tour firms to improve their quality of service.  
Anson Hung, Diamond Hill  
Bakeries wasting plastic bags
The plastic bag levy sends a message to consumers who would otherwise exercise no care for the environment, and live without any concern for conservation.
 I am totally against loopholes that allow this laziness and disregard to thrive. 
In bakeries I repeatedly say 'One bag will do' but my requests in English are either ignored or misunderstood by robotic staff who mindlessly and needlessly bag every item. 
Other food outlets, in their mistaken way of giving service, provide plastic utensils and wooden chopsticks for my take- home food. 
Needless to say I don't need them, and abhor them as they end up in the landfill. 
Nigel Pearson, Tsuen Wan
Other hotels unlikely to back ban
I think it's unlikely that other top Hong Kong hotels will follow The Peninsula in taking shark's fin soup off their menus.
 The Mandarin Oriental, Island Shangri-La and InterContinental  Hong Kong are three prestigious Hong Kong hotels  and they are also must-stay places for  tourists.
 Many visitors and locals alike enjoy eating famous Chinese dishes at the hotels' restaurants.  And for reasons of  status many families hosting a wedding banquet will, without hesitation, order shark's fin soup to be put on the menu.  It is clearly a very profitable option. 
The action of The Peninsula will not necessarily encourage other hotels to follow suit, indeed, the opposite might be the case. For these hotels it means that one of their competitors has left the shark fin market.  
They can only benefit from this if they keep their policy unchanged. This is a money-oriented city and for that reason it is not likely that other hotels will follow the example set by The Peninsula.  
Veronica Lam, Kowloon City
Peninsula's initiative  a let-down
It is nice that  The Hongkong and Shanghai Hotels Ltd  has announced it will stop serving shark fin dishes in its hotels including The Peninsula in Hong Kong. 
But according to the report ('Sea change? Peninsula takes shark fin off menu', November 22), The Peninsula said that 'those who have already placed their order for shark fin dishes for banquets next year will not be affected'. 
 So they will still serve shark fin, and the company's announcement that its hotels will stop serving it is worthless.
Kay Ross, Central  
Good news for MPF fund managers
 Individuals and businesses will have to pay more into Mandatory Provident Fund accounts ('Legco passes increase in salary cap for MPF', November 24).  The government assures us that the needs of employees has been taken into account. Does he mean bank workers only?
After the huge windfall for banks with the HK$6,000 hand-out it is early Christmas for them again. With the extra MPF payments, fund managers are laughing all the way to the bank.
Ken Chan, Tai Po



Letters