Regarding Secretary for Housing Frank Chan Fan’s suggestion that Disney should allow its site earmarked for phase two expansion to be used for transitional housing , I would like to point out that the site is the absolute worst possible location for development. The area is not properly serviced. It would provide an insignificant amount of housing, resulting in inefficient mass transit coverage. Basically, it would become a low-density car community, which Hong Kong neither needs nor wants. I suspect that the Hong Kong government is trying to sneakily revive its stillborn fantasy island off Lantau by building up the infrastructure to support it. The verdict is already out on the “so-called” land shortage: there is none! There is tons of land in the new territories that is hoarded by developers, or misused for open-air storage , or set aside for the completely obsolete “ ding” rights . Hong Kong people won’t be fooled by another one of these centrally-planned white elephants. J.C. Clement, Jordan Nostalgia trips won’t save Ocean Park The government is considering a proposal to pump HK$10.6 billion to support Ocean Park’s renewed development plan. The money is said to be for investment into the park’s future transformation, not to pay up its billions of dollars of debt. Also, Ocean Park is described as an indigenous park that grew up alongside Hongkongers and deserving protection. Collective memory would seem to be a good argument for the park’s preservation. But it would behove us to look back at the fate of other amusement parks enjoyed by previous generations, such as Lai Chi Kok Amusement Park , which was very popular in its day. It was a landmark entertainment venue and part of Hong Kong’s collective memory, too. But, because the government decided to use the land for housing and due to other challenges, it had to go. With regard to how Ocean Park will repay its debt, the bailout and future development may not hold the brightness and promise the government thinks it will. The park could well end up being a failure no matter how much money is pumped into it. There is nothing to assure us, such as a projection of future visitors, of a promising outlook. I am not trying to be downbeat about anything the government plans but, like many other Hongkongers, I am angry that our government time and again seems to be taking actions whose benefit is not clear, and without public consultation. Our government officials just seem to dream up a plan and implement it. We are sick of being taken for suckers time and time again. Randy Lee, Ma On Shan
