In 2018, the Hong Kong government and the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) put in place a new practice to enhance market transparency for public land tenders . Under this new policy, they announce the price of the successful bid of a tender and also make unsuccessful bids public on an anonymous basis. This practice was lauded as an enhancement to the public tender system. It not only helps developers gauge the right land prices, but over the long term it can provide a check and balance on the system to avoid overpriced bids that upset pricing trends and ultimately affect every homebuyer. MTR Corporation, however, has yet to adopt such a practice four years on, and this is unacceptable. In 2020 and 2021, almost 30 per cent of the residential units sold in the primary market in Hong Kong were developed or co-developed by MTR Corp. A majority government-owned mass transport operator and property developer, MTR Corp is a highly influential player in the property sector and is very much an institution that serves the public interest. There is no reason for the company to remain an exception to the government’s best practices in making the public aware of essential market information. Transparency alleviates waste and avoids resource misallocation. When developers pay exorbitant land premiums, the cost will eventually be borne by home buyers. The central government said in 2016 that housing should not be speculative and should be affordable to all. Nevertheless, despite the central government taking action to curb speculation, there were a few notable incidents of land grabbing in 2017 in Hong Kong. The consequences are still being felt in the market today. The Hong Kong government and the URA made the right move to enhance market transparency, and it is time for MTR Corp to do likewise. Ryan Lin, Mei Foo End land sale dependence to ease housing crisis The letter “Will Hong Kong’s HK$32 million government overhaul solve the housing crisis?” ( January 20 ) offered one solution to the housing crisis, but this is not the only possible answer. The government should look into whether there is a replacement source of income if we move away from depending on land sales to support our spending. Perhaps we could focus on initial public offerings – which can revitalise the banking and finance, accounting, legal and even retail sectors – and consider a levy on the stock market. Trading stocks is a virtual business and does not require much physical space. We can supplement that with developing tourism on small islands such as Cheung Chau , taking our cue from Sanya in the mainland and making the best use of advanced technology. There are many successful examples in mainland China of money-spinners that our government can borrow, and I am sure their mainland counterparts are willing to help. As soon as a replacement revenue source is established, the land auction price will not be important and the housing crisis can be eased. Edmond Pang, Fanling