bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

Letters

Britain long ago abdicated responsibility
I refer to the letter from Ned Donovan from the US ("Blocking MPs' entry simply admits shame", December 7).
The presence British National (Overseas) passport holders in Hong Kong is not a good argument in support of a purported British obligation towards Hong Kong.
When BN(O) passports were introduced in the 1980s as a residual British status for former British Dependent Territories (Hong Kong) citizens in Hong Kong after 1997, it was ridiculed as a status denoting "British (No)!"
It carries no right of abode in Britain and cannot be passed on to children of BN(O) passport holders.
If holders of such passports seek help from British diplomatic missions overseas, it is doubtful much help would be rendered today, in view of Hong Kong's diminishing value to, and connection with, Britain.
Since the second world war, in preparation for decolonisation, Britain introduced a series of immigration reforms and nationality laws to ensure that British nationals who acquired a British connection through the colonies would not have a chance to live in Britain.
The 1981 British Nationality Act was particularly egregious in introducing "one country, six citizenships".
By contrast, many countries in continental Europe, such as France and Portugal, gave their subjects in the colonies the same citizenship status as those in the homeland.
By depriving British subjects in Hong Kong of the same citizenship status and immigration rights as those in Britain, the UK has long abdicated its responsibility towards Hong Kong.
There is no honour and glory in British MPs seeking entry into Hong Kong to advance the democratic rights of former subjects whom they have long abandoned.
Anne Lau, Taikoo Shing
 
Many nations have fake democracy
In the article "Protest movement need not be bogged down by defeatism" (December 6), Stephen Vines refers to Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying's "dismal popularity ratings", which he doesn't mention are in the 40s.
Contrast that with US President Barack Obama (in the 30s) and French President Francois Hollande (down to 13 per cent in one August 2014 opinion poll). More importantly, Vines babbles like many of the young students do about "fake democracy". Any "democratic country" can be said to have a "fake democracy", depending on how you spin the issue.
In Japan, one vote in a rural prefecture is worth more than one vote in an urban prefecture. In the US, voters do not vote directly for the president.
They vote for electors, who in turn are supposed to follow their wishes when electing the president.
In 2012, Obama won 332 electoral votes, while his opponent won only 206.
In 2000, the candidate with more popular votes actually lost the election as his opponent won more electoral votes.
Did American students shut down the US?
The District of Columbia has a non-voting delegate to the US Congress.
Do the residents of DC plan to shut down the capital? What is your motive, Vines?
John Chiu, Wan Chai
 
Expansion of landfills not the answer
All Hong Kong's landfills face the same problem - they are nearing capacity because of the huge volumes of waste that are generated by Hong Kong citizens every day.
The government has come up with various strategies aimed at dealing with our waste and the proposal to expand the landfills is one of them. I am opposed to enlargement of these sites.
We should be looking for lasting solutions to our waste problems, and the expansion plans do not come into this category.
You cannot use limited space to satisfy unlimited human needs.
Also, residents living near the landfills already have to put up with unbearable odours coming from them and this has an adverse effect on their daily lives.
It would be better for the government to introduce policies which encouraged Hongkongers to generate less waste.
If people could be encouraged to throw out less rubbish and recycle more of it, we would not need as much landfill space.
The government needs to come up with a more diverse strategy, rather than concentrating on landfill expansions, and there must be much more public consultation on this subject.
Samantha Ho, Kowloon Tong
 
Obvious need for change of attitude
The problem of dealing with the city's solid waste is becoming more severe and, within a few years, our landfills will have reached capacity.
When trying to apportion blame, we have to accept that the major culprit, collectively, is the population of Hong Kong and the huge volumes of domestic and commercial waste people have generated.
The industrial waste problem is not as bad as it was, because of the introduction of penalties for firms generating too much waste. However, domestic waste remains at serious levels and is created by Hong Kong households.
Citizens still do not seem to be aware of the long-term harm they are doing to the city and to the planet.
Some experts have called for the construction of an incinerator, but that will take time to build and cannot address our short-term problems.
There have also been calls for more landfills, but having more sites will not solve the problems of generating enormous volumes of rubbish.
A municipal solid waste charge scheme must be implemented.
It will have a deterrent effect on Hongkongers.
If they face having to pay, they will be more likely to dispose of less solid waste.
To make the scheme effective, charges will have to be set at a high enough level.
Also, the government will have to be willing to offer subsidies to households on low incomes so that they can afford to pay the waste charge.
If the charge scheme is effective, then there will be less pressure on our landfills.
In addition, it is important for the government to step up public education so that more Hongkongers practise the four Rs - reduce, reuse, recycle and replace.
Only when people get used to a greener lifestyle can we solve the waste problem.
If attitudes and habits do not change in Hong Kong, then no matter what policies the government decides to implement, we will continue to generate a lot of refuse.
This new and responsible approach to waste reduction must come from citizens from all walks of life.
This is our home and we should all act in a responsible manner and do our best to protect it.
Rachel Ma, Yau Yat Chuen
 
Incineratoris clearly a better option
The government wants to expand Hong Kong's three landfills.
I also believe it might look to other Hong Kong districts for new sites.
Such a proposal will meet strong opposition from district councillors in affected areas because of the negative effects of landfills on nearby residents.
I would prefer to see an incinerator built rather than expanding landfills.
These plants can now be constructed using advanced technology.
This minimises the damage that is done to the environment and energy can be generated through the process of incineration.
While the government can take such measures it also must do more in the area of education so that Hong Kong citizens try harder to reduce the volumes of waste they produce in their homes.
Cora Ho, Sheung Shui


Letters to the Editor, December 10, 2014

Larger landfills bad news for residents. Photo: Bloomberg

Letters to the Editor, December 7, 2014

Smoking in restaurants is common in Beijing. Photo: AP

Protest movement need not get bogged down by defeatism

If the umbrella movement has achieved nothing else, it has fundamentally changed the way Hong Kong society sees itself. Photo: Bloomberg

Opinion

The presence of British National (Overseas) passport holders in Hong Kong is not a good argument in support of a purported British obligation towards Hong Kong.


Letters to the Editor, December 10, 2014

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}The presence of British National (Overseas) passport holders in Hong Kong is not a good argument in support of a purported British obligation towards Hong Kong.

The presence of British National (Overseas) passport holders in Hong Kong is not a good argument in support of a purported British obligation towards Hong Kong.