Protests versus reform

Tens of thousands of residents joined a demonstration on Monday despite a rainstorm warning. Meanwhile, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said he had heard the people's demand for universal suffrage and their concerns about the economy and livelihood, and promised the SAR government will respond to their demands positively.

Zhang Xiaoming, director of the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the HKSAR, said at a function marking the 16th anniversary of the handover that July 1 is a day worth celebrating and he hopes rationality and harmony will prevail in Hong Kong society. As for the peaceful demonstration, Zhang said it was yet another proof that Hong Kong still enjoys freedom of expression under "One Country, Two Systems".

These remarks are all sincere and honest. It's indeed inappropriate to regard the remonstrators with any bias or put them in political "boxes", because most of them are not anti-central government and do not want to see political turmoil in Hong Kong. They just have reservations toward government policies and social phenomena, and chose to express them by joining the demonstration. To such voices, the government should not only listen carefully but also respond positively.

The organizers and masterminds of the protest rally, however, do not deserve such tolerance, because they are not underprivileged members of society and their objective is to use the mass demonstration to undermine the SAR government headed by Leung, challenge the central government's constitutional authority and achieve de facto "Hong Kong independence", all in the name of universal suffrage.

Hong Kong residents should realize the masterminds of the July 1 demonstration and "Occupy Central" are not interested in their aspirations or needs for that matter, and their interests will be better served by pushing forward constitutional reform according to the Basic Law and relevant decisions of the National People's Congress Standing Committee and supporting the HKSAR government in doing a better job under the "One Country, Two Systems" concept, instead of merely marching in the street and shouting slogans.

This is an excerpted translation of a Ta Kung Pao editorial published on July 2.

Chi Yuen

A planning blunder

The government was forced to withdraw a funding request for the Tseung Kwan O landfill extension last week in the face of stiff opposition from most political parties in the Legislative Council. Different views have been expressed in the press since the issue broke, but few mentioned the fact that it is a planning blunder to begin with.

The Tseung Kwan O project faced the strongest resistance among the three. Its defeat was sealed when the government signed a land lease agreement with Mass Transit Railway Corp (MTRC) in May 2005 to develop a large housing estate in Zone 86 of the district. Advertized as Lohas Park, the development calls for dozens of high-rise residential towers to be built, providing more than 20,000 units to house 58,000 people on completion in 2019. Sales for the first phase of the massive project began in 2009, when a connecting MTR line began service.

Lohas Park is closer to the Tseung Kwan O landfill than any other housing estate in the district, drawing the fiercest opposition from residents there. Apparently, the government made a colossal mistake in the development by allowing MTRC to build the complex right next to the landfill.

Given the enormous amount of waste Hong Kong generates every day, there's no doubt the great majority of local residents support the landfill expansion plans. But, if the government had not made such a huge planning blunder, would the landfill expansion plan be blocked? This is not an easy question to answer, but I'm quite sure the district's residents' resistance would not have been so strong.

To be fair, the planning blunder was not the current-term government's fault. But, it must not taken as an excuse for not doing everything necessary to solve the problem of growing urban waste. The government must learn a lesson from its predecessor's mistake and never repeat it.

The author is a current affairs commentator. This is an excerpted translation of his article published in Hong Kong Commercial Daily on July 2.

(HK Edition 07/03/2013 page7)