talk back

Q Are language policy and the early admission scheme responsible for the brain drain?

I am writing in response to the article 'Only one top school has pupil with 5 As' (City, July 9). I believe the system that treats students with different financial and educational backgrounds differently should be abolished.

I sat for the HKCEE in 1997 and felt lucky my family was able to support me studying abroad so I didn't have to stay in Hong Kong for A-Levels. I have to confess I was a bit scared by the exams despite my outstanding results at certificate level. I did not want to go through the test prep torture again after tremendous hard work for the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination.

What's worse, the current system gives options to certain groups of people while leaving the rest without them. Some students, like myself, were lucky enough to study abroad after Form Six because our families were relatively well-off and others joined the Early Admission Scheme because of their strong academic records.

Consequently, the A-Level exams became a punishment for students who were neither rich nor smart. Every year, when the results of the HKCEE and Hong Kong A-Levels are released, the media begins counting how many top students come from the elite schools and tries to find out who the stars of the year are. Such obsession may not help us evaluate our educational system in the long term.

We don't need a school system that produces professional test-takers. We can find many across the border. Nor do we want a system that favours some people unfairly. There had been much talk about expanding the university programmes to four years and abolishing A-Level exams. Eight years after the handover, it is time to change our 5+2+3 British practice and integrate it with the American and Chinese 6+4 system.

Simon Ho Wang, Sheung Shui

Q Are five demerit points sufficient penalty for jumping a red light?

Deal with small problems when they happen, and you avoid larger ones. That's what happens on the KCR West Rail line. On two different occasions, I have seen a team of uniformed staff walk through the trains, one time penalising a passenger for eating in the train compartment, another time checking every passenger's ticket and finding a passenger who had managed to share a turnstile with her friend. It happens on KMB buses: once, three hoodlums sat at the back of the top deck and started smoking. Undaunted, the driver stopped the bus on the highway, went upstairs and put an end to that behaviour.

However, Hong Kong motorists speed all the time, fail to yield to pedestrians at zebra crossings, cut lanes dangerously - and get away with it. That is why they have the audacity to protest against the increase in the fine for running red lights. They want the green light to flash before changing to yellow and then red. How ridiculous!

The easiest way to avoid being penalised is to stop at a red light. This small minority of lawbreakers make a mockery of Hong Kong's excellent road system with their whining.

The government should do more. Among these protesters are minibus drivers, famous for being the worst drivers on Hong Kong's roads. No passenger or pedestrian is safe while these menaces tear up and down the street. Instead of taking them off the road, or at least making it mandatory to have driving speed recorders installed on the buses, what has the government done? It has required the installation of a display that shows passengers the speed the vehicle is travelling before their necks are snapped on impact.

The government must nip any adverse response to the fine increase, and deal with poor driving habits of dangerous drivers, before more lives are lost unnecessarily on our roads.

G. Marques, Mei Foo Sun Chuen

On other matters ...

All eyes focused on the tremendous traffic snarl-up of May 9 (Editorial, July 6) but the real culprit that started it all was absolved - the scaffolding that fell from a high-rise building on Prince Edward Road. Two of the three trunk road-blocking incidents that day were tied to fallen scaffolding.

Fallen scaffolding happens several times each year and are therefore not isolated incidents. It is time we stopped claiming the collapses are inevitable and think about preventing them from happening.

There is nothing wrong with traditional bamboo scaffolding. The culprit is the netting added to the scaffolding in recent years to manage any falling debris. It creates a huge 'windsail' effect that intensifies in proportion to the area of the netting and not the length of it. The windsail effect increases in proportion to the square of the wind speed. So, doubling the length or doubling the wind speed quadruples the pull of the netting, and so on.

Either the scaffolding should be fastened more securely to the building to withstand the pull, or the netting should be made to tear off before the scaffolding gives way in the highest expected winds.

From the containers falling off the stacks in Container Terminals 4 and 9 on that same fateful day, killing a truck driver, an academic calculated that the wind would have gusted up to over 640km/h to be able to push a four-tonne container off the stack. But that simply could not have been the wind speed.

He must be one of the academics whose competence was questioned in the letter 'Referendum a farce' of July 5, to have talked such nonsense. Air passing through the narrow gap over the access road between the high-stacked containers would have created a strong enough suction to pull the containers off the stack at a much lower ambient wind speed. The highest wind gust recorded by the Observatory that day was only 135km/h.

Peter Lok, Heng Fa Chuen

With respect to Kevin Sinclair, my former colleague, I'd like to answer his question: 'How can anyone design a building perched right on the waterfront of Fragrant Harbour without windows?' (July 6).

I wonder if Kevin has been reading about the spate of falling windows that have been in the news these past few days? If, supposing, these windows were falling off the Cultural Centre, where would the locals/tourists duck for shelter?

People who visit the Cultural Centre facilities, in my view, go there for the experience of performance art, aural and visual. If they want a view of the scenic extravaganza, they can always take a stroll along the promenade, one of the finest anywhere in the world.

Joseph Ley, the talented government architect and a member of the Hong Kong Olympic team in 1952, did a superb job as designer of the Cultural Centre. Judging from a profile of him that appeared recently in the Post, he has no regrets for not having any windows at this first-class artistic facility. Neither does the Sydney Opera House, Usher Hall in Edinburgh or the Melbourne Arts Centre.

Vernon Ram, Lamma Island

I fully agree with the reader who complained about HSBC's lack of branches. Its service management to their customers is shocking. I stay in Tseung Kwan O and have to travel two stops on the MTR to get to counter service at the bank. And when I get there I often have to wait over an hour - sometimes as many as three hours - to get to the counter. While the ticket system allows people to go off and do their shopping or other things, it doesn't solve the problem if the sole purpose of your trip is banking.

Also, I have never understood why its internet banking stops 'after hours'. Is there someone who manually checks every internet transaction and who goes home at 5.30pm? Isn't one of the attractions of internet banking that you should be able to do transactions at any hour?

And, why is there such a lag between credit card activity and the credit card statement? What prevents it from being instant?

Recently the bank sent its internet customers an added security feature - whether they wanted it or not. No doubt the cost of this little device is going to be recovered from its clients.

My internet account is secure enough, without the device, and I would rather see the bank put the money to better use - like in services.

Susan Ramsay, Tseung Kwan O

I was utterly astonished to read that the Leisure and Cultural Services Department had considered prosecuting people for singing in Tuen Mun Park. Can I prosecute the LCSD for allowing regular noisy concerts in the Crescent Garden in Happy Valley, despite numerous complaints?

Or is it perhaps not covered by the law with which the LCSD seems intent on harassing people, merely for singing and playing guitars?

The site in Happy Valley is right across the street from hundreds of apartments, with the buildings forming a semi-circle around it. Someone in the LCSD apparently believes this is a good spot for an outdoor theatre, and concerts may be held there at will. There were pop concerts there, with amplifiers turned up high, on Sunday evening January 15, Sunday afternoon February 27, Sunday afternoon April 3, and most recently Saturday afternoon June 25 - a particularly noisy one! A Cantonese opera concert was held there on April 10, 11 and 12 in the evening.

It is absolutely absurd that the LCSD would be concerned about a group singing in the park, when they apparently have no qualms about disturbing hundreds of Happy Valley residents for the entertainment of a few dozen.

I live on the 13th floor and the noise from these concerts is loud enough to interfere with my watching television, even with the windows closed.

I believe that such a noise nuisance is illegal. The LCSD should put an end to them.

William Meacham, Happy Valley