It is not responsible for ensuring the availability of transport or advising employers to make better arrangements for their employees. It is the duty of the respective government departments and public transport operators, as well as employers, to formulate good policies and arrangements to meet the needs of the public and provide reasonable care to employees in the event of a storm.

They cannot expect the Observatory to manipulate the timing of the issuance of adverse weather signals to deal with the various problems that they face. They also cannot totally rely on the Observatory to give advance warning of weather conditions, which by nature cannot be accurately predicted too much in advance.

The MTR could have a more customer-friendly policy of carrying passengers already on board a train to their destination, instead of a rigid arrangement of stopping the trains immediately after a signal No 9 is raised. The practical difference between signals No 8 and 9 is not a clear-cut black or white.

When the Observatory has already indicated the possibility of a higher signal, the MTR could request news reports to include a reminder of the suspension arrangement.

Employers should have more caring arrangements to avoid hardship for their staff. Everybody should do their own part with human-controllable measures, instead of expecting the Observatory to control its warnings, which depend on the weather. The Observatory is not God; it can’t control the weather.

Joseph Lee, Kwun Tong

Observatory and MTR could both take steps to improve

When Typhoon Koinu approached Hong Kong, the public was only given a 15-minute warning before typhoon signal No 9 was issued. This caused great confusion and inconvenience to many people trying to go home by train and or to leave the airport.

I propose that the Observatory improve its practice in similar cases in the future. If a typhoon is quite close to Hong Kong when signal No 8 is issued, the Observatory could add a warning making it clear that a slight bending in the typhoon’s path could result in a higher signal being issued at very short notice, and suggesting that members of the public make the necessary arrangements.

As for travellers stranded in the airport, perhaps the MTR could maintain a limited service for a short period by running the trains at lower speeds and using longer (therefore heavier) trains. I leave it to the experts to decide whether this is feasible.

Of course, safety must come first. The MTR could also liaise with the Observatory to check wind speeds. That would help its decision-making.

Anthony Ha, Mid-Levels

Special team could transport airport arrivals during storms

A contingency plan is one designed to meet unforeseen and spontaneous crisis situations. As such, unconventional measures need to be considered. In the absence of public transport options, most people tend to turn to taxis, which can be very expensive, especially in extreme weather. Therefore, we should focus on other ways to get our air passengers out of the airport and into town at such times.

People would have to be moved by car, van, coach or bus. Our government presumably has a large number of vehicles for day-to-day use, which would be parked during typhoons, except those to be used to meet emergencies.

There would also be large numbers of drivers – civil servants or not – who would be sitting at home without much to do. The government could form an emergency transport team just to handle airport passenger traffic when public transport is unavailable.

The government could underwrite the necessary insurance, and test and licence successful volunteers to drive government vehicles when called up. These volunteers could be moved to various “holding centres” in anticipation of an emergency at the airport.

Such a plan would not only provide relief during emergencies but also help build community spirit.

James A. Elms, Wan Chai