That Shrinking Feeling

If this graffito - spotted in Bonham Strand West, home to many dried seafood merchants - is to be believed, shark stocks are not the only thing getting smaller.

Making It Better:
Hong Kong Shark Foundation

Down in the Mud

From Yes Minister to Spitting Image

When I began this blog, in addition to some serious analysis (which I have sadly little time for these days), my intention was to poke gentle fun at those in public life who deserved a bit of mockery.  Unfortunately these are no longer gentle times.  We have a rabid dog in the White House, a murderous thug in the Kremlin, and a genocidal goon in Zhongnanhai, plus a general resurgence of fascism, a global decline in human rights, and a planet well on its way to unchecked environmental disaster. So though I still label it humour, most of my satire these days is far too serious to be funny - like Trump's response to the Khashoggi killing, which represents a new low even for him (only days after you thought he'd already reached the bottom by mocking a victim of sexual assault after placing her alleged assailant on the highest court in the land).  Hold on tight, things can only get worse from here.

A home on the rolling deep

The last thing the critically endangered Chinese white dolphin population in the Pearl River Estuary needs is thoughtless politicians advocating yet more development in their territory.  See here and here.

Making It Better:
Hong Kong Dolphin Conservation Society
WWF Hong Kong

Everything Old Is New Again

Theresa May knows very well the claim that Brexit will release substantial funding for the NHS was discredited by just about every economist within days of the referendum result.  Apparently she is too desperate to care.  As another leading idiot would say: sad.

A cunning plan (no turnip involved)

In a world where the lunatics have not only taken over the asylum, but are clearly intent on returning it to the Dark Ages, it is easy to become disheartened.  But there is something the rest of the world can do to fight Trump's short-sighted environmental menace.  Just suppose that all of America's trading partners got together and agreed to impose a climate tax of say 10% on all imported American products, to be lifted only if the US lives up to its commitments under the Paris climate change agreement.

Could this happen?  It may sound an impossible dream to get so many countries to agree on anything, but if they could overcome their differences to set up the Paris agreement, then it can be done again.  After all, the stakes could not be higher - the Earth's sustainability as a habitat for life.  Our life.  Spread the idea.

Downcycling

Country Matters

It looks like the Rotary Club of Kowloon could use some spelling lessons!  Be that as it may, at a time when the water that Hong Kong imports from the mainland has been found to be heavily contaminated with bacteria, it's a good idea to demonstrate public support for our beleaguered country parks.  In addition to supplying much of our clean fresh water, they are a vital haven for wildlife as well as being ideal for hiking, birdwatching, cycling, photography, and general relaxation - not to mention a peaceful retreat from urban noise and chaos, something that will increasingly be essential if we are to retain our sanity in the face of JHong Kong's expected population growth.

So get out and enjoy their scenic beauty tomorrow, post your pictures online, and show the government that we don't want this precious asset handed over to property developers to be smothered in concrete.

Making It Better:
Save Our Country Parks Alliance - and also on Facebook

Nevergreen

Does their compulsive urge to destroy beautiful vegetation stem from some deep-rooted childhood trauma over being forced to eat up their spinach or broccoli?

[First frame adapted from the delightful Calvin & Hobbes comic strips.]

More fiddling

CY Leung plays Nero again with a big announcement at his last LegCo appearance - primed by an obviously staged question from DAB leader Starry Lee.  I'm as much in favour of clean streets as the next man, but doesn't the government have more important things to do something about?  Their problem is that genuine solutions to the real problems would require offending either their Beijing overlords or the tycoons who control our economy, so they are forced to fall back on sideshows instead to give the appearance of doing something.

If the Message Stinks, Repeat It Louder

When not blatantly brown-nosing China's leaders with an editorial (above) that could have been cloned straight from the front page of the China Daily, the South China Morning Post is usually sucking up to Hong Kong's business lobby.

Naturally, therefore, it joins the hysterical chorus demanding a third runway at Chek Lap Kok.  The public, it tells us, "can be excused for feeling confused about the development of the airport's third runway".  The Post suffers from no such uncertainty, assuring us with an air of smug superiority, "that the project is still challenged by different sectors at this stage underlines the need for better explanation."

That the project has failed to win public support is arrogantly assumed by the writer to be a mere failure of communication.  All that needs to be done, in his (or her) view, is to keep shouting the same message at the public until it gets across to them.

Does it not occur to these dumbclucks that the real reason the plan "has yet to get broad public support" may be that the case for the third runway is far from proven?  Perhaps the public is not convinced because the case for the project is not convincing.  For a start, even the editorial admits that it has not yet been decided who will pay for this grandiose mega-project, estimated to cost HK$136 billion -- though such massive infrastructure ventures typically end up costing far more than the originally budgeted figure.

Although the government conducted a public consultation exercise on the issue back in 2011, this was based on a highly selective presentation of the facts, and several trends have changed since then.  China's economy has slowed, along with the rest of the world's, probably leaving forecasts of future demand overstated.  Climate scientists' warnings of the dangers of global warming have become more urgent, though carbon emissions were not even considered in the original environmental impact assessment.  Even "pro-China" politicians are now calling for a cap on tourist numbers as Hong Kong creaks at the seams to accommodate too many mainland visitors.  And recent studies suggest that the beleaguered local Chinese White Dolphin population - whose habitat sits in the way of the proposed land reclamation - is under even greater stress than previously thought. All these have negative implications for airport expansion.

In fact so many factors are involved that it is doubtful that any forecast of future air travel demand can be more than a best guess, depending on what assumptions one chooses to make.  Economic developments, fuel costs, the ongoing movement of manufacturing away from the Pearl River Delta deeper into China, the adoption of larger planes like the Airbus A380, the effect on wildlife, the impact of China's expanding High Speed Rail network on demand for air travel, the shortage of local construction workers - so many uncertainties surround all these variables that any prediction is likely to be well off the mark.  In fact the only certainties -- increased noise and air pollution if the project goes ahead and the likely wiping out of our local dolphin population -- all support the cancellation of the expansion plan.

"Our status as a regional aviation hub" the Post argues "hinges on whether we can compete with other airports" -- but readers' comments beneath the original editorial question whether we can -- or need to be -- a regional aviation hub in a region with four other airports. Indeed, some suggest that the region's airspace is too crowded already to permit the number of extra flights required to make the additional runway cost-justifiable.

Of course those in the aviation sector -- with the Post as their cheerleader -- predictably insist that the third runway is urgently essential, because it will benefit them.  But is is by no means clear that it will benefit the community as a whole.

Making It Better:
Worldwide Fund for Nature

Overlooking the Obvious

Ten facts that should be obvious to any reasonably intelligent person here, but apparently not to the Hong Kong government:

1. Hong Kong is already grossly overpopulated and doesn't have room for more people.
2. A growing population will need more green space for relaxation and recreation, not less, so we should stop eating away at it for other purposes.
3. Pushing through the government's blatantly undemocratic political reform proposal is more likely to exacerbate discontent in Hong Kong than to eliminate it.
4. With more and more people and a finite supply of land, the village house policy is clearly unsustainable (apart from being a scam whereby "New Territories villagers" who don't even live in Hong Kong any more come back to grab their piece of subsidised land).
5. There is a limit to the number of tourists Hong Kong can accept without straining its infrastructure to breaking point.
6. The bridge to Macau will never be economically viable or environmentally sensible.
7. If you're going to build a high speed railway between two cities (not a bad ideas in itself), the termini should be at major transport intersections to facilitate onward travel, not stuck in the middle of nowhere.
8. As one of the richest cities in the world (in terms of GDP per capita), Hong Kong could easily afford to eliminate poverty and give all its citizens a decent standard of living - there is absolutely no reason why 80-year-old ladies should be reduced to scavenging cardboard boxes to survive.
9. When small businesses complain that they can't afford to give their workers a better deal, it's not because wages are too high, but a) because too much of their revenue goes to paying inflated commercial rents, and/or b) they're greedy (pick one or both).
10. When the mainland insists on selling us more water than we need at a price much higher than other cities in China pay, it's time to look again at the economics of desalination, not just meekly accept whatever non-negotiable deal is on the table.

South of the Border

ATV News headline: "Development Secretary tries to calm villagers affected by border development". [my italics]

Interesting choice of phrase there, considering there are suggestions in some circles that the North East New Territories development, as it's officially called, may in reality be less about Fanling North than Shenzhen South.  Paranoia?  See here also, then you decide.

Old Boys Network

Chief Excutive CY Leung today refuted criticism that his recent round of appointments to public bodies was a case of "jobs for the boys", pointing out that one of his highly qualified cronies appointed was in fact a girl.

Seriously, look at this: Vincent Lo succeeds Marvin Cheung as Chairman of the Airport Authority for one year, at which time Jack So will take over.  In the meantime Jack So remains Chairman of the Trade Development Council until mid-2015, when he will be succeeded by:  (pause for fanfare) - Vincent Lo!  Also popping up as a new member of the Airport Authority is that rather unpleasant character Franklin Lam, whom we thought we'd happily seen the last of when he resigned from the Executive Council after it emerged that he'd sold a couple of flats shortly before the government imposed additional stamp duty to cool the property market.

Lam is also one of the mad bunch who want to smother our country parks with concrete and encourage even more mainland tourists to flood Hong Kong.  He and Lo were on the (previously) losing side of a battle with Marvin Cheung over plans to develop a new shopping mall at the airport - we can probably assume, therefore, that the new appointments reflect the government's support for constructing yet more shops selling overpriced luxury crap to yet more unwanted visitors.

Meanwhile CY's campaign manager Fanny Law becomes chairwoman of the board of the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation, while solicitor Larry Kwok, who "has been serving in many Government commissions" (in other words is another one of the boys), becomes the new Chairman of the "Independent" Police Complaints Council.  Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok argues that the Council's professional secretariat will somehow ensure Kwok's impartiality.

In a city of seven million talented people, why are appointments to public bodies so often drawn from the same incestuous little pool of (sometimes ethically-challenged) yes-men (and occasionally women)?

Next to a Landfill - the Best Place to Buy Property

Nobody in Hong Kong wants to live near a landfill, as we've seen in the recent spate of nimbyism over the government's expansion proposals.  Yet paradoxically, there are great advantages to buying property right next to one.

True, while the landfill is in operation, you will suffer from the smell, filthy dusty air, and infestations of flies.  But once it is decommissioned, you will have something few Hong Kong property owners can enjoy - at least a ten-year guarantee of an unimpeded green view.  While others watch despairingly as reclamation or new buildings block the open views they paid dearly for, you will relish the sight of a verdant forest gradually spreading over the former garbage dump as it settles down and decomposes.  Nothing can be built on it until this process finishes.

Undisputed Nonsense

undisputed (adjective):not challenged or called into question; accepted. 

From last night's ATV News: [Chinese] Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang "said the Vietnamese boat capsized after smashing into the drilling platform, which he emphasised is in undisputed Chinese territory."

This story differs from China's original account of the incident, which claimed that the sunken Vietnamese vessel collided with a Chinese fishing boat (which just happened to be in the vicinity of the contentious oil rig by chance, presumably, like the other 40-odd boats hanging around the area).  That aside, unless Qin's statement has been badly translated, what are we to make of that word "undisputed"?  The Chinese government knows very well that its claim to the area of sea in which this occurred is hotly disputed by Vietnam; and, indeed, that large parts of its other maritime claims in the South China Sea are fiercely challenged by half a dozen other nations on whose coastal waters they intrude.

Given this, Beijing is clearly well aware that the area of water in question is far from being undisputed Chinese territory.  One wonders, therefore, why its spokesman is allowed to make statements that are obviously bare-faced lies.  In what way does it strengthen China's case to talk undisputed bollocks?

Try this: ask a European to name half a dozen great European sailors and navigators from history.  He or she is likely to reel off without much difficulty such names as Columbus, Vasco da Gama, Magellan, Drake, Cook, Bligh, Cabot, and so forth.  Now ask a Chinese person the same question.  Their immediate answer will be Zheng He (who was in fact more of a diplomat than the admiral he is often described as).  After that will probably come a long uncomfortable pause...

The reality is that, despite its "claims from history" to vast areas of ocean, China has never been much of a maritime power.  And while Chinese fishermen certainly roamed the South China Sea from ancient times, so did fishing folk from the other lands around it.  In an age when fish were abundant and the idea of undersea mineral extraction had not yet been conceived, it is very unlikely that any of them thought of the vast ocean as the exclusive property of any single country.

The Toilet Quiz

The furore over a mainland kid peeing in the street in Mongkok has become exaggerated out of all proportion.  As Hemlock points out today, the poor kid has unwittingly become a symbol of all the grievances Hong Kongers feel over the uncontrolled flood of tourists overrunning their city.

To put things in perspective, try this simple exercise:

1. Make a list of all the public toilets you know in the area where you live or work.
2. Imagine you are a visiting couple unfamiliar with the area, accompanied by a crying 2-year-old demanding the potty NOW!  How many of them would you be easily able to find within a couple of minutes?

And another question for Hong Kong parents: have you ever let your kid pee in the street or other public place because he/she was unable to reach a toilet in time?

The massive influx of mainland visitors is responsible for many problems here, but let's not make one poor child's bladder a scapegoat for everything that's wrong with the situation.  And maybe the Hong Kong government could consider putting up more signs pointing the way to the nearest public loo - that would be helpful to locals too.

The Big Budget Question

With everything we love about Hong Kong, from press freedom to our country parks, seemingly under sustained assault at present, the annual budget seems curiously irrelevant this year.  Financial Secretary John Tsang used his budget speech as another opportunity to repeat his gloomy prediction that the SAR will run out of money in a few years, despite having bigger reserves than most countries many times our size.

No doubt his figures will be endlessly picked over by analysts; however, no one is likely to answer the really big budget question. If a private company employed a Chief Financial Officer who year after year predicted that the company would make a modest loss, but in the event it repeatedly turned in massive profits, he would surely be fired as incompetent.  So why is someone who gets his sums wrong year after year still in charge of our economy?

Moving in the Dark

The Hong Kong government announced yesterday that an APEC meeting planned for the city in September will instead move to Beijing - if they can find it!

Putting Tourism into Proportion

A hysterical (in both senses) article in Beijing mouthpiece The Global Times castigating Hong Kong for selfishness in not wanting to be flooded with ever more mainland tourists asks:

"Chinese tourists bring their bad habits of shouting, noise level, shopping in crowd and in bulk to Paris, London and New York. Only Hong Kongers react to these problems more violently than the 'foreign devils/ghosts'. Why is Hong Kongers' tolerance level so low? Shouldn't they have thought about their inability to tolerate and embrace (Chinese tourists)?"

[Translation by the invaluable (to non-Chinese readers) Real Hong Kong News – apparently from a longer Chinese version.]

The answer to this question is easily illustrated:

In simple terms, tiny Hong Kong had a ratio of approximately 3.4 visitors per resident in 2012 (most of them from the mainland), compared with 0.8, 1.6 and 0.6 visitors respectively for the much larger Paris, London and New York metropolitan areas.  Is it any surprise that we feel like we’re being crowded out of our own city?

[Sources: Population figures taken from Wikipedia.  Tourist numbers from here - the latest complete comparative figures I could find, though other sources differ – things have already become much worse in Hong Kong since then.)]