The Lion Rock Spirit Lives

 

The picture shows a group of people who rushed to lift the taxi that crashed in Taipo yesterday (at a spot where I've crossed the road hundreds of times) to free victims trapped underneath.

This is far from the first such case in Hong Kong.  Years ago I helped to lift a car that knocked down a young boy in North Point.  Meanwhile it has been widely reported that in mainland China, most people will steer well clear of helping accident (or worse) victims rather than get involved in potentially messy consequences.  

There would be scope for an interesting master's thesis on why mutual aid thrives in a supposedly competitive capitalist society while being conspicuously absent in a supposedly collectivist one.  Suffice it to say here that "one country, two systems" is not just about politica and economics.

Look Back in Danger

Four decades in Hong Kong have given me a great admiratiuon for the Hong Kong people (if not, alas, for those who govern them). Yet despite their hard work, intelligence, and dedication to principle, one quality is curiously lacking - they seem to be totally unaware that vehicles can travel backwards as well as forward.  Any driver in Hong Kong trying to manoeuvre into or out of a tight parking spot can be sure that the second they start reversing, some idiot pedestrian will walk across their path a few inches behind them, seemingly blithely unaware that they are actually moving.  I'm not sure what accounts for this blind spot - posasibly the fact that many Hongkongers lack driving experience - but you can be sure that if one of these people who put themselves in harm's way actually suffered an injury, they would immediately blame the poor driver for it and not their own lack of caution.

Mind how you go.

Unconscious Uncoupling

While admiring the courage and determination with which young Billy is facing his horrific injuries, I can't help feeling his doctors might have made better decisions if they were conscious at the time!

Who's Blocking Whom?

So let me see if I've got this straight: a group of minibus drivers take over the street to protest against people planning to take over the streets.  Hmm.  Another story for the "You couldn't make this stuff up" file.

So shines a good deed in a naughty world

Yesterday my father-in-law took a taxi home.  The taxi driver subsequently picked up another passenger, who found a bunch of keys - one of them apparently a car key - on the back seat.  After dropping off that passenger, the driver took the trouble to go out of his way to drive back to our home to ask if the keys belonged to my father-in-law.  As it happens, they didn't - presumably having been dropped by an earlier passenger - but in a time when Hong Kong is increasingly fractious and divided, it's good to be reminded that simple human acts of kindness can still be found here.  And if you left your keys in a taxi yesterday, the driver will have handed them in to the police by now.

The heading, by the way, is from Shakespeare's A Merchant of Venice.  Looking it up to be sure of getting the wording right, I learned that in Shakespeare's time "naughty" meant "worthless" (i.e. "worth naught").  So I should also thank the taxi driver for furthering my etymological education.

Racing to come second

To normal people, the fuss over Sebastian Vettel's win in the Malaysian Grand Prix will seem bizarre.  Vettel apologised to team-mate Mark Webber for overtaking him to win the race, contrary to their team's instructions.

I always thought the idea of a race was that the fastest competitor comes in first.  Apparently in the weird world of Formula 1, that's not the case.  Then what is the point of racing?  In any other sport, fixing the result would get you disqualified.

Polls Apart

I sometimes respond to the South China Morning Post's opinion polls on its website, but I just as often find them irritatingly meaningless.  Take today's, for example: the question asked is: "Is India still a safe destination for foreign tourists?"  Pertinent, after recent widely-reported rape cases there, certainly, but totally unscientific.

First of all, note the implied assumption that India was previously safe.  Then consider the impossibility of summing up the safety level of a large and enormously diverse country of more than a billion people in one snap judgement.  Are you safe at the Taj Mahal?  Probably.  In Indian-occupied Kashmir, or the poorest slums of Kolkata - probably less so.

And what do you mean by "safe" anyway?  Likely to get raped or murdered - even with the occasional case that hits the headlines, not very.  Likely to have your pocket picked?  Much more probable - but not only in India.  Safe from your own stupidity?  Thousands of tourists die in foreign countries every year because people tend to take foolhardy risks on holiday that they would not take at home, from overdosing on drugs to riding motorcycles without a helmet to swimming in dangerous waters to eating in places with dubious hygiene standards - or even over-exerting themselves sexually!  Most Hong Kong people consider Thailand a safe destination for tourism, but apart from the country's appalling level of road safety, five foreign tourists and a Thai guide died in 2011 because of over-exposure to a pesticide used to kill bed bugs!  Who would have seen that coming?

Then there is the question of what one means by a foreign tourist.  In a tour group or travelling independently?  Male or female?  Travelling alone or with a companion?  Able to speak the local language or not?  Staying in luxury resorts or local flophouses?  All of these factors - not to mention one's visible "ethnicity", as officials like to call race these days - could affect how safe one is.  But a white female friend of mine lived for two years in India, travelling alone on a limited budget, with no problems, and loves the country.

My advice: don't let this kind of question put you off travelling except for avoiding obvious trouble spots (two other friends enjoyed a wonderful trip to Syria some years ago, but I wouldn't advise it at the moment)..  Just take sensible precautions, remember shit happens everywhere, and as they used to say in Hill Street Blues: "Be careful out there!"

Van-ity

The fact that someone has personalised licence plates on their car tells you something about what kind of person they are.  The contents of the plate tell you more.

Perhaps the silliest I've seen in Hong Kong is one I saw recently which just said VAN.  I can only think of three possible reasons for choosing this:

• The owner's name is Van.  However, the only person I've ever heard of with this name is Van Morrison.  "Van the Man" doesn't live in Hong Kong (though I wish he'd give a concert here), and isn't the type to draw attention to himself anyway.
• Post-modern irony - so subtle that others won't grasp it.
• The owner is so forgetful he may not remember what type of vehicle he's driving.

Whatever the explanation, I wish "Kung Hei Fat Choi" to all my readers.  Have a Van-tastic Year of the Snake!

Coach Trip to the Dentist

When setting the video recorder for another programme the other day, I caught a few minutes of Coach Trip by chance. For those who don't know this programme, it's a kind of "Big Brother on Wheels" - the idea is to dump a bunch of publicity-hungry strangers together in an artificial environment, in this case a coach tour around the sights of Europe, and hope to derive entertaining television from their ego trips and petty squabbles.

As with all "reality TV", it bears about as much relation to reality as Britney Spears does to real music, and what I saw convinced me that I would never want any of the participants as travelling companions. But what struck me particularly about it was that almost all the participants appeared to have awful teeth. I wonder if the producers secretly intended it as a searing satire on the sad state of British dentistry?

IgNobel Support

With imprisoned Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in enforced absentia today, China’s fearsome Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu has again been required to spout nonsense with a straight face, solemnly declaring that “most of the world” supports China’s opposition to the awarding of the Prize to Liu. “Most of the world” apparently means the 17 countries other than China which have declined to send an official representative to the award ceremony – out of 65 embassies invited, and representing less than ten percent of the world’s almost 200 nations. One country, Serbia, has reversed its earlier decision not to attend.

The BBC analyses the reasons behind these countries’ boycott of the event. Broadly they either object to a dissident receiving the prize for fear of encouraging their own internal opposition movements, or have close economic ties with China and fear reprisals from the PRC. But really, what a sad list of countries to parade in support!

Several of them (*) score highly on the Failed States Index: Three of them (plus China) are ruled by leaders who feature in the list of the World’s Ten Worst Dictators (#), which also includes several other close allies of China. Four of them are among the world’s heaviest users of the barbaric death penalty (&), a list again led by China (though the supposedly civilised United States also ranks highly, to its shame). And several of them appear on Transparency International’s list of the world's most corrupt countries (@), while several others (including Russia, Iran, Kazakhstan and Pakistan) are not far off inclusion in this category..

Almost all countries on the list are repressive and authoritarian dictatorships, and in most of them, a wealthy ruling elite enriches itself while the majority of the population lives in dire poverty. Afghanistan, for example, has the world’s second or third highest infant mortality rate, and an average life expectancy of 44 (Japanese live nearly twice as long, with Hong Kong a close second). Pakistan and Morocco have literacy rates barely above half the population. Saudi Arabia denies women the right to vote in local elections – and indeed most other rights; for example, they are not allowed to drive. In at least three countries on the list, it is doubtful whether the results of the most recent national election truly reflect the people’s will (%). Both Saudi Arabia and Iran strictly limit religious freedom, while Vietnam also does so to a lesser extent. And in Sudan, the government has done little or nothing to stop the ongoing genocide in Darfur.

With friends like these, China does indeed enjoy impressive support – from a handful of the world’s most backward, repressive and corrupt countries. Here’s the list:

• Russia – the only major nation on the list, an ostensibly democratic country where almost all media outlets are now controlled by the government, organised crime has tentacles everywhere, and local democracy has been replaced by central government appointment of provincial governors.
• Saudi Arabia [# &] – an absolute monarchy where the royal family enforces strict Islam at home while many of its members make frequent overseas trips to enjoy the illicit pleasures they deny to their subjects.
• Kazakhstan
• Algeria
• Tunisia
• Pakistan [*]
• Sri Lanka [%]
• Iraq [* & @]
• Iran [# & %]
• Vietnam [&]
• Afghanistan [* @ %]
• Venezuela [@]
• Egypt [&]
• Sudan [* # & @]
• Cuba
• Morocco.

Wake-Up Call

I added the Hong Kong Observatory to my RSS feeds a while back, then forgot all about it because it never actually fed me anything. Suddenly yesterday it's woken up and started actually feeding me local weather forecasts.

Perhaps this is a sign that there is hope for the Hong Kong government yet. Now I am waiting eagerly for other government departments to similarly stir from their slumbers and get on with what needs doing around here: rein in the big property companies, extend recycling, move quickly towards full democracy, fulfil the long-delayed promise to extend the North Lantau Country Park, clean up the air, reform the widely abused village house policy, conserve what little is left of the city's architectural heritage, spend police effort getting dangerous drivers off the roads instead of giving out unnecessary parking tickets, and a million other things.

Dream on...

No Car No Go

Yesterday was supposedly No Car Day (not a smart time to choose, on a Chinese festival evening when everyone in Hong Kong leaves work early and rushes home to celebrate with their family). So of course senior members of the government were all seen making their token once-a-year trip on public transport. But you just know that they'll be back in their chauffeur-driven Beemers and Benzes today. In three decades in Hong Kong I have only once seen a LegCo or ExCo member on public transport - Szeto Wah, when he was still in LegCo, sat across from me on the MTR one evening. So next time you wonder why public transport fares are allowed to go up by more than the rate of inflation, or why there are so few cycle paths in urban Hong Kong, ask yourself how these decisions look through the eyes of decision makers who have no idea how the ordinary person gets around.

More money than sense

So George Michael has (again) joined the long list of celebrities found driving under the influence of various substances, legal or otherwise - a list that in the last few years has included Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Nicole Richie and Mel Gibson.

What puzzles me is why? These people have truckloads of money - Michael's estimated fortune is US$90 million; Hilton inherited less of her father's fortune than she expected, but makes millions herself each year; Lohan reportedly makes US$7.5 million per film, though relatively poor Richie has to make do with a net worth of a mere US$5 million (still more than many people earn in several lifetimes), far less than Gibson's estimated US%850 million pile (about to be severely depleted by his impending divorce, but still leaving him enormously wealthy). Any of them could easily afford to hire a chauffeur. So why is it that someone who thinks nothing of ordering a thousand dollar bottle of champagne is seemingly too mean to fork out a hundred bucks for a taxi ride home after a night on the town?

Is it simple stupidity? Or could it be that their egos are so swollen they truly believe their desire to drive themselves is more important than the safety of everyone else on the road? Or both?

Incidentally, the word stupid is etymologically related to "stupour" (stupor for Anericans), which is what George Michael seems determined to spend the rest of his life in. A great pity for someone so talented.

Easy for you to say

Following yesterday's tragic events in Manila, Hong Kong politicians from Chief Executive Donald Tsang downwards have been quick to express their anger at the handling of the hostage situation by the Philippines police. It is of course easy to sit back in a comfortable room in front of your big screen TV and pass judgement in such cases. Perhaps they should give a thought to whether the right course of action is so obvious when you are out there with inadequate protection facing an armed kidnapper in torrential rain. Yes, the Philippines police appeared to lack training, equipment and leadership - all the fault of politicians, not the officers themselves. Despite this, they put their lives on the line, facing gunfire and eventually successfully rescuing at least some of the hostages alive. Don't they deserve some credit for this?

As for the Hong Kong government placing the Philippines on its tourism blacklist, advising against travel to the country, this is a silly knee-jerk reaction. The proper use of this mechanism is in cases where the security situation in a country presents a general threat to visitors, such as in Bangkok a few months ago during the clashes between the government and redshirt protesters. There is no such general danger in the Philippines - the biggest risk most Hong Kong tourists face there, unless they visit the remoter parts of Mindanao, is that of the occasional pickpocket and the country's appalling driving standards, both of which can be found much closer to home.

This was a one-off incident of a disgruntled armed nutcase running amok and killing innocent people who just happened to be there at the time. Such incidents happen from time to time in many countries, including in recent years Canada, the UK, the USA and China. It is hard to imagine the Hong Kong government advising against travel to any of those countries had a similar event occurred there.

A tunnel too far

Almost the first thing you learn when studying economics is the basic law of supply and demand. Simply put, lower prices increase demand, higher prices reduce it where substitutes are available.

For some reason, the management of the Western Harbour Tinnel seems never to have grasped this elementary rule. Their response to years of losses has always been, not to lower tolls in the hope of attracting more business, but to raise them even further, thereby driving yet more potential users to divert to the congested but much more affordable Cross-Harbour Tunnel between Hung Hom and Causeway Bay instead.

From tomorrow Western Harbour Tunnel fees, already the highest among the three tunnels beneath the harbour, will go up yet again. This could be an indication of chronic stupidity, but I suspect there is another agenda behind it. The company may figure that the government, exasperated by the impact of CHT congestion on traffic management, will eventually solve its problems by taking the Western Tunnel off its hands, implying that the company would receive substantial compensation and rid itself of a loss-making asset. Watch this space.

The Singapore Syndrome

The system that enables you to listen to your car radio when driving through tunnels in Hong Kong also allows the tunnel companies to override the radio signal with their own transmissions. This is fine when they use it to make helpful traffic announcements, such as telling you that a particular exit road is closed or when a blockage will be cleared. And indeed they sometimes do this (though as my wife noted, only in Cantonese - perhaps English or Putonghua speakers don't drive?).

Unfortunately they don't limit themselves to this. It is intensely irritating to be listening to the RTHK news in the Lion Rock Tunnel, only to have the airwaves hijacked by some inane do-gooder relaying unnecessary government propaganda, like telling you not to drink and drive. Almost as irritating, in fact, as watching television and having the government exhort you to "love your family" (seriously) during the commercial breaks. Where do these people think we are - Singapore?

Nosey Parker Wants to Know

Why is it that most car parks in Hong Kong appear to have been designed by people whi have never driven a car in their lives?

On my way to where

In another shining example of the Hong Kong government's dazzling intelligence, the Highways Departmnt (I assume) has covered all the direction signs on the Tsing Ma Bridge with bamboo scaffolding. So if you're coming from the airport and don't know which lane you should be in, don't expect much help in finding out.

And to the driver of the taxi running along the airport highway without lights at close to 10pm last night: the only reason I don't give your number here to tell eceryone what a prat you are is that it was too dark to see it clearly.

The Way You Do the Things You Do

Immediately following the horrific train accident in China a couple of days ago, Chinese authorities immediately dismissed two senior officials of the railway, then announced that an inquiry would be held to determine the cause of the crash.

Wouldn't it make more sense to hold the inquiry first to determine who was at fault before taking action against anyone? And if they already have a scapegoat to carry the can, why do they need an inquiry?

Meanwhile, following today's disastrous bus crash which saw (at last count) 18 people on their way to church here in Hong Kong come face to face with God sooner than they expected, transport officials insisted the road is safe because they've put up plenty of warning signs telling motorists not to exceed the speed limit. Yeah, knowing Hong Kong drivers, that would really stop them speeding ...

Unable Seamen

Last night's crash between two Macau ferries should never have happened. Sure it was foggy, but a) those vessels carry radar; b) there are well-established rules of navigation designed to avoid collisions; and c) common sense says that if you can't see far ahead, you should slow down. Conclusion: unless the Marine Department investigation turns up something surprising, the most likely reason that 140 people were injured is either incompetence, carelessness, or both on the part of one or both crews.

That was not the only accident in local waters yesterday. Hong Kong's loony drivers are dangerous enough; it would be nice to be able to take a ferry to Macau without worrying that there may be an idiot at the helm, or steering another vessel in the vicinity.