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

I refer to Timothy Cooper’s letter (“Hong Kong’s housing crisis has a quick solution: reclamation for the East Lantau Metropolis”, June 19) and Michael Chugani’s column (“How Hong Kong’s housing crisis can be solved by thinking like Donald Trump”, June 13).
Cooper suggests fast-tracking land reclamation, while Chugani advises prohibiting foreign ownership of local housing. I have a question: why not both?
Obviously, reclamation is the right track for providing a large supply of land. Cooper says that, through sophisticated techniques, Hong Kong can build 1,400 hectares of new land in just four years, or 2,000 hectares in about five-and-a-half years.
Although reclamation may sacrifice some marine-life habitat, it is the only way to provide such a large scale of land for Hong Kong residents.
Watch: Why land in Hong Kong is so expensive


Time for action, not just debate, in tackling Hong Kong’s housing crisis
However, Cooper slammed Chugani for protectionism for recommending curbs on foreigners purchasing property. I can’t see any problem with such restrictions.
In 2017, 18 Chinese municipal governments rolled out property cooling measures, including purchase restrictions. At the 19th National Congress, President Xi Jinping reminded us that “homes were meant to be inhabited, not for speculation”.
Despite some economists saying that such interventions would destroy Hong Kong’s reputation as the world’s “freest economy”, the title has earned us nothing.
As former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping said, there is no absolute boundary between capitalism and socialism, as capitalism has planned economy elements, and socialism also has market economy elements.
In Hong Kong’s case, it is acceptable for the government to roll out more cooling measures, even though it may remove the brand of “freest economy”. The capitalist would say this will drive away foreign capital from Hong Kong, and the economy will deteriorate. However, if all Hongkongers could have a comfortable home, I don’t mind devaluing my wealth by 50 per cent.
Patrick Mak, To Kwa Wan


Landlords of 5,557 subdivided homes seek 3-year grace period to fix flats

Day 10 of Tai Po probe: fire department admits delays, ‘inadequate’ safety assessments

Hong Kong developers roll out 1,300 homes as prices edge up on firmer demand

A group of Wang Fuk Court residents float ‘profit-making’ in-situ rebuilding plan

Hong Kong housing

Reclamation and protectionism can both be used to solve Hong Kong’s housing shortage

Cheung Wong-tim, 71, said he’d rather spend his days in an air-conditioned municipal centre and nights in neighbourhood parks than remaining in his stuffy, windowless room in an old building in Sham Shui Po, during the May heatwave. Photo: Sam Tsang

A‘Hong Kong first’ solution for the housing crisis: use PLA land for flats

President Xi Jinping attends the People’s Liberation Army parade at the garrison in Shek Kong on June 30, 2017, marking 20 years since the army was first stationed in Hong Kong. Photo: Sam Tsang

General shot of PLA Gun Club Hill Barracks. Jordan. 13SEP14

Opinion