The SCMP reports…
Hong Kong tourism authorities have pledged to review the roll-out of a lighting project along a trail on The Peak after mounting complaints that flowers and trees were chopped down to make way for the installations.
But the Tourism Board defended the project, saying it had consulted local residents and sought advice from tree experts to minimise the impact on the surrounding environment.
In a statement on Sunday, the board said it valued residents’ views and would now “conduct broader consultation to review the overall arrangements of the project” to “refine its details, with a view to achieving a balance between tourism development, environmental protection and residents’ needs”.
A pic of an alleged lighting enhancement – looks like an anti-aircraft missile emplacement. Another of an ex-tree.
According to this way of thinking, you can’t ‘develop’ tourism unless you damage the environment and/or pay less regard to residents’ needs. In which case: maybe stop trying to attract visitors? Why do we need a ‘balance’ between degrading natural and living environments and not degrading them?
The HK Tourism Board has also decided to promote ‘industrial brands, miniature art, religious culture, and local characteristics’ it says here. This includes…
…organised tours of Kowloon Motor Bus depots … QR code display boards at temples [and] a dedicated tourist map [of Yuen Long].
This isn’t desperation to boost visitor numbers (which are already overloading many parts of the city). It’s desperation to appear to be doing it. Will the HKTB people ever work out that tourists want to see places that haven’t been messed up to ‘attract’ them?
Samuel Bickett on the appointment of 79-year old New Zealander Sir Terence Arnold to Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal…
I have been through his record, and what it shows is a lawyer and judge who, when the state’s security or public-order claims have collided with someone’s liberty, has usually sided with the state. As New Zealand’s chief government litigator, he fought to deny bail to a recognized refugee who had spent two years in detention without charge, and to keep a television crew from interviewing him. He prosecuted an opposition MP and two broadcasters for contempt of court while declining to pursue a senior judge accused of discussing details of a Family Court case himself. As an appellate judge, he wrote a judgment upholding a peace activist’s conviction for burning a flag at an Anzac Day dawn service [and in retirement] … in the case that should worry Hongkongers most, voted to clear the way for a man’s extradition to China on the strength of Beijing’s promise not to torture him.
New Zealand’s higher courts overturned his rulings on the bail, the interview, and the flag. In Hong Kong, nobody will. That, presumably, is the point.
In Englesberg Ideas, Jeffrey Wasserstrom compares Joshua Wong to Thai and Polish activists.
Henry Tang’s wine collection has been auctioned by Christie’s. Chateaux Lafitte Rothschild, Latour, Margaux, etc. HK$50 million worth.










