Pakablog!

There was a relatively good turnout today for the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong – unfortunately I was not present (since i’m still in Beijing), but was pleased to hear the march mentioned on the BBC World Service.

According to the SCMP an estimated 70,000 participated in the rally – including ex-chief secretary Anson Chan. This is a higher than expected turnout, and only goes to show that the will for change in Hong Kong is still strong. And though change has been promised, a promise with no accompanying timetable is about as trustworthy as a written a testimony from a gorilla.

Joseph Zen was quoted in the SCMP commenting that “Tsang says his proposal is a big step towards full democracy: this is the biggest lie I have heard” – harsh words from a bishop accusing one of his subjects of sinning. He continues to say “We are going sideways. We will go in circles with no direction and a dead end.” At the current rate, we’ll sooner break down than reach our destination.

What was amusing to hear was Donald Tsang, speaking whilst the rally was taking place, saying that he also aspires for universal sufferage and would like to see it implemented within his lifetime. To me, it sounds like he has to try a bit harder: for sure the mainland authorities are not going to be easy opposition to defeat, but if compromise is the name of the game, Hong Kong is definitely drawing the short straw. Tsang has the option now to press ahead with Beijing for more constructive political reform for the territory; the alternative, easy way out, is to just let Beijing pull the strings.

Sadly, when it comes to elections, Donald Tsang seems to have no more finesse than Tung did.

No Comments »

… or at least that’s how the Beijing government would prefer it to be, if only they got their way in Hong Kong. But that’s not a joke either: at the current rate of constitutional development, Beijing may well achieve just that!

For those who don’t know, the HK government have released their proposals for constitutional reform of the 2007-2008 Chief Executive & Legislative Council elections some two weeks ago. These proposals, briefly, will double the election committee for the chief executive (from 800 to 1600) and will add 10 legislative seats: 5 to be directly elected, and the other 5 chosen by district councillors (who are elected by the people). Although this is undoubtedly an improvement over previous years, the actual difference this makes to the public is minor: we will still have virtually no say in the running of government. The changes to legco will still result in a 50/50 split of directly elected vs. less-than-directly elected councillors, and the doubling of election committee numbers to 1600 still amounts to some 0.023% of the population only. That’s the number of people who get to pick the chief executive!

A recent article in the SCMP (actually 9th November – not that recent, but i’ve been busy!) cites Central Policy Unit head Lau Siu-kai as saying that “if such major reform could not get through, his [Donald Tsang's] authority, political reputation, and even governance would be called into question” . Lau has hopes that the proposals would pass in legco, to risk further jeopardisation of the ‘reform’ process. I would say that for starters, the current government proposals are far from ‘major reforms’. Secondly, in the fight for any cause, one cannot just accept any olive branch handed to them to avoid risk of jeopardising the wider cause – doing so would give one party the upper hand always and reduce any motivation for reaching a proper compromise.

I accept that universal sufferage is for sure ruled out of the 2007/8 elections, and even believe that the pro-democracy parties are somewhat stubborn in their continual pursuit of this (though they have mellowed down somewhat recently) when they can be more productive concentrating on the next opportunity after – but it shocks me to see that an increasing fragment of Hong Kong society fail to see the importance of having open and accountable government.

Nearly everyone wants to see success from the ‘one country, two systems’ policy – many it seems, by turning this gradually into ‘one country, one system’. The irony is that this would only show the opposite. I believe that ‘economic prosperity’ can be achieved alongside political reforms – many others, it would appear, see the latter as hindering the former. If anything, transparency and representative government help ensure economic stability – providing the population are mature enough for that of course… and I like to believe in Hong Kong that we are.

No Comments »

Yet another reason why people should not rely on Windows for running consumer electronics and public display systems.

Let’s just hope that the KCRC didn’t adopt Windows for their train control systems!

No Comments »

What a shame, that yet another dai pai dong has had to call it quits. The famous Man Yuen noodle shop in Central shut for the last time yesterday at 8pm after mounting pressure from the government since the license holder passed away back in May. Only spouses may inherit the license; this licencee was single.

Food critic Lau Kin Wai said of the closure (from the SCMP):

“When the government is spending billions of dollars building a culture district in West Kowloon, they are ignoring the local culture,” he said. “The right way to treat the hygiene problem of dai pai dongs is reinforcing management, not killing them.”

I could not agree more. The government automatically assumes that outside=dirty and conversely believes that indoors=clean. This oversimplistic assessment of hygiene is typical of the HKSAR. I am in no doubt that there are many lingering filthy restaurants, and there is no reson to think that outdoor premises cannot be kept clean either. What is important is management and standards : good standards can be maintained under both circumstances, and it would be far more productive to tackle the problem from that angle rather than shutting down dai pai dongs under the banner of hygiene.

As usual, this government seems more concerned about ‘image’ and has little interest in preservation of culture. It is more interested in creating artificial “cultural events”, or spawning new developments in the belief that new projects are the only things that attract visitors and locals. When I travel it is the tradition and culture I am interested in – any country can build a disneyland or a cable car if they wanted to… but history and culture evolves and spans hundreds (if not thousands) of years. As does the food – and for many, food is an important part of our lives.

When will the government learn that our heritage and history are as important as development for the future?

No Comments »

A chicken apparently came close to being fined US$54 for jaywalking in California. Says the BBC:

“Linc and Helena Moore had been fined on 26 March after their chicken wandered onto a road in the small rural mining town of Johannesburg in Kern county.”

Lucky for the Moore’s the case was thrown out:

“The fine was dismissed after a lawyer for the bird’s owners argued that the fowl was domesticated and could not be classified as livestock.”

Under California livestock laws (#16902) – A person that owns or controls the possession of any livestock shall not willfully or negligently permit any of the livestock to stray upon, [or end up on] a public highway.

- which of course makes sense. Afterall, farmers should be responsible for looking after their livestock; and chicken are no exception. So the next time you see a chicken crossing the road, don’t bother asking it why – just call the cops.

No Comments »

On the 8:30 ABC Asia Pacific news tonight : a Chinese couple who face deportation for a failed asylum application. The couple reportedly cited the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing as their reasons for eligibility. What’s intriguing about this story is that the couple are from Hong Kong.

Some details were available through the ABC News Website, but strangely the article makes no mention of the couples origin. What amazes me is that this couple ever thought that they could get asylum in the first place on the grounds of persecution at home, when ever since the Tiannanmen Square “incident” thousands have demonstrated annually right on the streets of Hong Kong. This is one heck of a way (ultimately unsuccessful, I might add) to gain citizenship of another country! They achieved partial success – Mr & Mrs. Lo’s kids were granted Australian citizenship; but now the parents must go home.

Whether it was part of the deliberate plot to get the kids citizenship I don’t know – I failed to get further details. But it is clear that the concept of “thinking outside the box”, so proudly practiced by Hong Kong people, is often taken too far! If it’s any consolation – for all that has eroded in freedoms and liberties in Hong Kong recently, it’s still nice to see the city declared by some as ’safe to demonstrate in without fear of persecution’.

If only the Lo’s had burnt a flag before their departure!

No Comments »

Tuesday’s Technology Post in the SCMP highlighted the problem faced by many Hong Kong people these days : mobile spam.

Recorded sales messages – delivered at high speed through annoyingly high-pitched monologues – are now a mainstay of using a mobile phone in Hong Kong.

Answered in Hong Kong, these unsolicited calls may be little more than a rude interruption. Answering overseas, however, involves expensive roaming charges.

My last roaming bill from three days in Singapore/Malaysia was some $1600 – part of that thanks to sales calls I received during my trip. Telephone spam is becoming an increasing problem in Hong Kong, in a city that lacks legislation banning such cold calling to mobile telephones (many countries have laws against this). I easily receive at least four spam calls a week to my cell phone – usually a combination of both automated and human calls. Unfortunately, most have their caller ID’s blocked – now leaving me weary about answering unidentified calls. One such call was from Wharf Telecom (no caller ID) – they were advertising a service to “unblock all caller ID’s”. Oh the irony! But they don’t win my custom ; congratulations, they’ve now made my blacklist.

Sadly, most people in Hong Kong lack education of the fundamental moral principals of privacy and would fail to see the ethical problems of employing such tactics in the workplace. Education is definitely the key – business owners need to be convinced that there are better ways of marketing their products, and that treating your customers well is the prelude to a good long term relationship. Unfortunately, some Hong Kongers still have the “earn more now ; who cares if we see them again” mentality.

It’s good that the government is finalising an anti-spam bill – albeit not to be tabulated to Legco till 2006. Although it currently excludes voice spamming, this will hopefully be included in the legislation too. Nonetheless, such legislation has been long awaited – all I can hope is that punishments are severe. Nine years would satisfy me… per word.

No Comments »