HK's
education system creates tension in many families
Thursday,
25 October, 2007, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/article/612862/hks-education-system-creates-tension-many-families
I am writing about the
problem of domestic violence in Hong Kong.
If we understand violence
to be socially and culturally triggered, changing the society and modifying the
culture - especially our exam culture - seem to be the two things left to do.
Take my late dad for
instance. When he first came to Hong Kong, he was an apprentice in a metal
workshop. His employer would not teach him anything, afraid he would set up on his
own after learning the trade. So, he had to observe closely what his boss was
doing and learn that way. If he fouled up he was slapped.
He finally set up his own
metal workshop and had employees and my elder sisters working for him. But he
had picked up his boss' methods and my sisters grew to fear him, for he was
demanding and fierce. He could be violent though not against me. While I was
working for him in his metal workshop, he expected me to 'pick up' his skills
the way he did.
I have inherited my father's
bad temper.
My father had many mouths
to feed and needed my sisters to work for him, but they were all deprived of a
secondary education.
Education was a luxury then
and it is a torture now. And though times have changed, the situation hasn't.
Competition is still fierce, in kindergartens, in upper primary, where children
have to fight for a place in a good secondary school, and when every assessment
counts. The pressure is no less than the one exerted by my late father on my
sisters when feeding seven empty stomachs was my parents' main concern.
The same violence goes on,
only the victims are today's schoolchildren who have already lost interest in
their school work.
I have heard people I know
talk of horrible moments when they lost control and had to take measures to
guard their children against their own temper.
Why all this madness? Let
us ask the Education Bureau. Why is education a pleasure in other places and a
living hell in Hong Kong for so many children and parents?
Zachary
Ng Kwok-keung, Lai Chi Kok
(
A response letter) Our education system
has to be competitive
In
his letter ('HK's education system
creates tension in many families', October 25) Zachary Ng Kwok-keung saw a
link between domestic violence and our education system.
He said the present education system created a lot of tension between children and parents and led to some young people losing interest in their studies. I think he was being overly harsh when he described education as a torture.
I do not think students face excessive pressure. There is some pressure, but they have to learn to deal with it, as they will face similar challenges as adults and must learn to deal with these problems.
There may sometimes be a link between education and domestic violence, but there are many different causes of domestic violence, such as financial problems and family relationships. Mr Ng said competition was fierce in schools. Of course it is, but then competition is fierce in society in general. There is nothing wrong with competition being strong, as long as it is fair. The harder you try, the more you will gain. The fact is that there is no free lunch. Keeping children cocooned and apart from the real world is pointless, because that is the world they will have to live in as adults.
They must acquire knowledge through studying and reading textbooks, but they also need to learn the rules of life.
He said the present education system created a lot of tension between children and parents and led to some young people losing interest in their studies. I think he was being overly harsh when he described education as a torture.
I do not think students face excessive pressure. There is some pressure, but they have to learn to deal with it, as they will face similar challenges as adults and must learn to deal with these problems.
There may sometimes be a link between education and domestic violence, but there are many different causes of domestic violence, such as financial problems and family relationships. Mr Ng said competition was fierce in schools. Of course it is, but then competition is fierce in society in general. There is nothing wrong with competition being strong, as long as it is fair. The harder you try, the more you will gain. The fact is that there is no free lunch. Keeping children cocooned and apart from the real world is pointless, because that is the world they will have to live in as adults.
They must acquire knowledge through studying and reading textbooks, but they also need to learn the rules of life.
Wong Ka-yan, Sham Shui Po
Our strict
education system kills off initiative and ruins self-confidence
Sunday, 11 November, 2007, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/article/615177/our-strict-education-system-kills-initiative-and-ruins-self-confidence
A study has found that
parents who praise, rather than constantly criticise troublesome children, get
positive results ('Parents should praise, not punish: survey', October 26).
This survey has caused me to ask if it is it time for those parents who believe
in a strict approach to lighten up.
I was lucky enough to have
been a student of a famous Catholic English primary school. I owe my job as an
English teacher to the education I was given. But all the time I was there, I
never received any praise - not once. Not only that but my mother even employed
a tutor who beat me if my schoolwork was poor.
I bear no grudges, because
my tutor came from a strict church background, which believes in the need to
repent and guard against your own sins. The church leaders' attitude was that
we were all sinners, not people to be loved and treasured. They talked of
hidden guilt, urging people to be humble and receive salvation.
In the primary school we
were mocked in front of the class if we talked. School became something you had
to endure so you could acquire knowledge.
Using your own initiative in
your studies was unheard of. Later on in my education, during a short period in
the US, I saw a different attitude. Almost everybody there lavished praise on
you. For the first time in my life, college was really a place where lecturers
treated students as friends and students treated lecturers as equals. After
half a year studying there, I came back to continue my tertiary education with
more confidence. I put up my hand and asked questions in lectures. I guess that
explains why parents keep sending their children abroad or to an international
school in Hong Kong.
However, criticism is the
norm here and a lot of students do badly at school, because of this. They think
they should be humiliated, because they are not measuring up. This attitude is
exemplified by our chief executive, who believes we cannot rule ourselves and
should be given the power to run things our way.
It is always 'we' the
rulers, against 'those', that is, those who are governed, never 'us' together.
Perhaps, that is where the real problem lies.
Zachary Ng Kwok-keung, Lai Chi Kok
Zachary Ng Kwok-keung, Lai Chi Kok
Bad
report card for most parents (A response
letter)
I
refer to the letter by Zachary Ng Kwok-keung ('Our strict education system kills off initiative and ruins
self-confidence', November 11).
I was a student of a famous Catholic English primary school on Hong Kong Island. I received praise from teachers and my parents also gave me credit for the good work I did at school.
For secondary school I went to a boarding school in England. I learned self-discipline and to be obedient to my teachers and submissive to higher form students. The head boy and head girl exercised absolute power, which is tougher than the situation that exists in Hong Kong.
The key issue in Hong Kong is the attitude of the parents. They push their children to the limits, and yet with some parents, their emotional responses to their children and the efforts they are making in school can hardly hold them up as role models.
Mr Ng mentioned his positive experiences in the US. I studied there after finishing at my boarding school, and I agree with him. Professors in the US welcome constructive debate in class, because that leads to input from other students in the class. That is really what university education should be all about.
Your correspondent laid blame on the education system in Hong Kong. However, I am also concerned that the majority of parents in Hong Kong still follow the traditional rules, by which they do not give credit to their children for the efforts they make.
Like Mr Ng, I hope that the educational system in Hong Kong will improve.
However, I would also like to see a marked improvement in the attitudes in behaviour of parents when it comes to their children's education.
I was a student of a famous Catholic English primary school on Hong Kong Island. I received praise from teachers and my parents also gave me credit for the good work I did at school.
For secondary school I went to a boarding school in England. I learned self-discipline and to be obedient to my teachers and submissive to higher form students. The head boy and head girl exercised absolute power, which is tougher than the situation that exists in Hong Kong.
The key issue in Hong Kong is the attitude of the parents. They push their children to the limits, and yet with some parents, their emotional responses to their children and the efforts they are making in school can hardly hold them up as role models.
Mr Ng mentioned his positive experiences in the US. I studied there after finishing at my boarding school, and I agree with him. Professors in the US welcome constructive debate in class, because that leads to input from other students in the class. That is really what university education should be all about.
Your correspondent laid blame on the education system in Hong Kong. However, I am also concerned that the majority of parents in Hong Kong still follow the traditional rules, by which they do not give credit to their children for the efforts they make.
Like Mr Ng, I hope that the educational system in Hong Kong will improve.
However, I would also like to see a marked improvement in the attitudes in behaviour of parents when it comes to their children's education.
Alpha Keung,
Sai Wan Ho
Q What should be done to
reduce the workload of teachers? Monday, 28
November, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/526840
Imagine every week you
have 100 Form 5-7 compositions sitting on your desk, waiting to be marked and
commented on, not to mention other written exercises such as task one of the
A-levels Practical Skills for Work and Study paper, or the written task of the
HKCEE listening paper, the two newspaper clippings' summaries and comments from
each of these 100 students plus their weekly journals - which are the required
work of every student during a weekly cycle. You have to mark 500 pieces of
written work mostly strewn with all sorts of grammatical mistakes and paragraph
after paragraph devoid of topic sentences or a theme.
But that's what teachers
teaching three senior forms are supposed to do! That is not all: during lunch
breaks, these students ask you to give them oral practice to prepare them for
their A-level exams, so you have to start several oral groups. You have to sit
with these groups in every lunch break, listen to each and every student
present for two minutes, comment on their performance, then start them on their
discussion and comment again on each performance.
Is that all? There is the
school's music and speech festival that you have to help organise after hours.
Happy time! You have this new debating society you must attend!
And of course you can't
turn down an offer to be a judge of an English singing competition. But
remember, that is only a tiny fraction of the work of a teacher. With different
seasons and months, different tasks will present themselves to make your life
rich and busy. There is a lot of fun in working with students and I am not
complaining. No, I never do. I am still enjoying it a lot. So if you want to be
a teacher, don't be scared. You won't die.
Name and address supplied
Q Are the standards of English
language teachers cause for concern?
Monday,
12 December, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/528894
If people still remember the reasons Hong Kong was given nine years of compulsory education and why, overnight, two universities were increased to eight, one should not have been so surprised at the level of our English teachers. The government never intended education for all when nine years of education was made free.
If people still remember the reasons Hong Kong was given nine years of compulsory education and why, overnight, two universities were increased to eight, one should not have been so surprised at the level of our English teachers. The government never intended education for all when nine years of education was made free.
In the
past, children were not protected by a law outlawing them working.
Then the
law that says children under 15 are not allowed to work came in. It caused a
lot of trouble by leaving children to run wild on the streets. The school was
the best place to keep this population unfit for the labour market. That was
the real function of the school - to be a playground or a prison for this big
number of the workforce being made redundant. The government added a few school
places, opened a few more posts and went on doing what it used to do. If you
cannot make it, bad luck!
You can
imagine how teachers had to struggle with this new breed of children because no
new and easier curriculum was written for them and the existing one did not
cater to this mass, mostly from the grass roots. We had an elite education
system then. We still do.
As a lot
of new teachers had to be recruited to teach children who were not prepared or
willing to suffer the heavy school workload, the government could only make do
with second-rate job seekers. And who became teachers? Those who could not make
it to the choicest professions.
Name and address supplied
Exposing
the darker side of a good education Saturday,
01 December, 2007, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/article/617759/mailbag
How is
domestic violence caused by the Hong Kong education system? A lot of parents of
the last generation didn't have much formal education and know the only way to
improve their standard of living is to give their children a better education
than they had. There is a Chinese saying that all parents want their children
to become dragons flying in the sky. This means that parents expect their
children to make great achievements in the future. Why do Chinese parents want
their kids to achieve great things? Because unlike in the US, which has a good
welfare system to take care of the elderly and the unemployed, parents here
depend on their kids to take care of them when they are old.
As most
companies in Hong Kong take employees based on the academic performance in
university, a good secondary school education becomes necessary. And to enter a
good secondary school, you must start working hard in kindergarten to get
yourself in a famous primary school. But how can you tell parents, especially
uneducated ones, what to do when their kid's test or exam is coming up and he
or she is too young to understand the importance of all this and is still
taking it easy? Isn't it natural for the father to resort to the stick, since this
is the only effective way he knows how to make his kid work?
How do we
reduce domestic violence? Simple. Take care of us when we are old so we no
longer have to force our kids to look after us.
ZACHARY
NG KWOK-KEUNG, Mei Foo
Q Would flexible working help
Hong Kong women? Saturday, 26 November,
2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/526546
Flexible
working would not only help women, it would help Hong Kong in ways you cannot
even imagine.
Let me
tell you a true story.
Some
years ago, a teacher in our school resigned because she was given a class that
made her feel her life was being wasted. Students were inattentive and not
handing in their assignments. Furthermore, at home, her two children were
growing up without proper parental attention.
When her
first born was still too young for kindergarten, she discovered the child was
constantly being fed instant noodles for lunch and left in front of the
television to entertain herself.
The bad
class was actually a blessing. It helped her to make up her mind to quit. And
she did.
She felt
she was better off doing something good for her kids.
The
principal invited her to take on two junior classes as a part-time teaching
assistant. The salary was much lower although the work was no easier.
At least
she could spend her mornings with her son while she marked the students' work.
She now
has time to give quality teaching to her two classes and help out her own
children before tests and exams. She even gets to tell them bedtime stories.
The cherry on the top was when she was cited as an exemplary teacher by the
Education and Manpower Bureau and her teaching practice was videotaped and sent
to every school. Her experience was shared and benefited many.
So, would
flexible working hours help Hong Kong women? No need to ask! Bosses, what are
you waiting for?
Name and address supplied
Q
What do you think of the border controls on mainland mothers?
Monday,
29 January, 2007, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/article/579974/talk-back
Mainland mothers are big
business since Hong Kong has moved nearly most of its businesses across the
border and is basically thriving on our services industries.
We can still make some
money as long as the nouveau riche keep coming to buy our electronic goods,
jewellery and daily necessities, like milk powder.
But soon they will have
shops selling these items at their doorsteps. What are we going to sell them
then?
The mainland is catching
up fast. Many mainlanders are living much better lives than us and shopkeepers
across the border no longer want our currency that they once valued. As trade
grows, and quick-minded merchants move the goods to where mainlanders can buy
them conveniently, Hong Kong retailers will lose a lot of business, our economy
will suffer.
Not so our services
industries. That is the only thing they cannot move, not yet anyway.
As mainland mothers burden
our medical services and education, we should make great use of this
opportunity. As teachers are still haunted by the real danger of losing their
jobs, with kindergartens closing one after another and student numbers in
primary schools shrinking, it is only natural for our government and
universities to start thinking about training more degree holders, teachers,
doctors and nurses to serve our new customers coming from the north.
An entrepreneur would see
mainland mothers as a big business not to be missed.
Due to traditional Chinese
thinking and the one-child policy, there are many pregnant mainland mothers who
can afford our service and are willing to pay.
Why doesn't Hong Kong
provide a through-train service for them, from the moment the mother is
pregnant to after the baby is born: from hospital care to playgroup, to
kindergarten and primary education.
All Hong Kong needs to do
now is build more maternity wards, open more midwife courses for Form 5 or Form
7 graduates who aspire to be nurses. The immigration department can also set up
a station to process all the required documents after the baby is born.
You can imagine business
does not end there, so doctors, nurses, and kindergarten and primary teachers
will not need to worry about losing their jobs again. We will also have a
thriving hotel and retail business, with mainland mothers and their relatives
spending here every day.
Why chase them away and
bar them from coming in and giving us the much-needed money? I do not
understand.
Zachary
Ng Kwok-keung, Mei Foo Sun Chuen
What do
you think about teenagers' attitudes to sex?
PUBLISHED : Monday, 25 February, 2008, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/article/627519/talkback
As the shackles of eastern
morality and western religion on this economic hubbub loosen, people have
greater freedom and economic power to indulge more in all sorts of carnal
pleasures and satisfy their lusts under the excuse of gaining freedom to be
themselves.
Romantic love between two
people used to be non-existent, and marriage used to be something older
clansmen used to tie two clans or two families together, for the survival or
the prosperity of their people.
Kings and princes did it to
enlarge their empires or keep peace. But with the disintegration of the feudal
society and the growth of the concept of the individual, love, or sex, is no
longer in the hands of the elders.
With this new-found
freedom, sexually mature youngsters and unhappily married grown-ups do not know
how to handle their burning desires, or rather, do not feel the need to curb
their wild passion once lit.
This often results in
uncared for children growing up unloved and unruly. They will go on to create
problems for us and become society's headache if we do not have a policy to
take care of them.
Sex is fun, no doubt about
it. But the caring of a baby is not, at least not to those who have no direct
relationship with it. If a baby is not prematurely aborted or flushed down the
toilet by a teen mother, but left around some street corner, then it requires
many people's concerted effort to see that it grows healthy until it becomes
independent.
Do we have a way to rebuild
the moral fibre of our society or even the willingness to treat sex as not just
fun but something more? Just look at all the posters in MTR stations and count
the number of half-naked women. Women are pictured as objects of desire.
Who is allowing this? Who
is encouraging this? This attitude to sex, like good food, is to be enjoyed.
And women, in this atmosphere, have to make themselves palatable to men.
Zachary
Ng, Mei Foo
Would a smoking ban encourage you to eat
out more? Thursday,
27 October, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/522232
I am a family man and I
don't eat out very often.
Though I hope more
restaurants will ban smoking, I really don't think eating out has anything to
do with a smoking ban, especially when you like a place so much because of the
good food, good music or the good service which makes the place unique.
At a shabby restaurant next
to where I work, the cashier and waiter remember me and my taste in food, and
they sometimes throw in a few jokes and warm remarks which make me feel at
home. Then you don't smell the smoke anymore.
Of course, I don't mean
restaurants that are choking you to death with dense cigarette smoke that
leaves a bad smell on your clothes long after you have left. I mean in the
restaurants where you don't have too many smokers and the pace is leisurely - a
place to chat with your friends, a place of your own - and where you won't really
pay much attention to one or two smokers so long as the ventilation is good and
the atmosphere is just right.
You really don't mind that
lone smoker at all.
At a certain live jazz pub
in Tsim Sha Tsui, where the music is great and the musicians are fun-loving
people who like to poke fun at the customers with their music, you wouldn't
mind the smokers.
Of course, the ventilation
and the air conditioning are very good there. You see people smoking, but you
don't smell it as much. In fact the rising smoke really adds to the atmosphere
as you sway and nod to the loud music while downing good food and cold drinks
for a reasonable price.
Zachary
Ng Kwok keung, Mei Foo
Q How can minibus safety be improved? Friday, 18 November, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/525419
Asking
a minibus driver to drive more slowly is like asking the government
not to fill the harbour. Same thing! The day the government slows down its
development is the day our minibus driver drives slowly and safely. Is it
possible? Everybody knows the answer.
Life is super-busy in Hong Kong and everybody is trying to make the most out of every minute: to sleep yet another minute, to finish the work at hand, to earn a few dollars more before they go to their next appointment. And the minibus driver is there to make up the extra minute you have lost.
You should thank such a transport system, and such daring drivers. You curse them first or the second time you are swerved from one side to another on your seat. But soon, you get used to the speed and you even learn to enjoy the thrill and exhilaration. Carpe diem. (seize the day!)
Everybody coming to make a living in Hong Kong is making use of every single second to 'contribute' to the wealth of this city. Everybody is working overtime and everybody is thankful for the fast transport, the MTR, the minibus ... for getting them to their destinations in the shortest time, and not the tram or the ferry where tourists can leisurely enjoy the scenery outside the window.
Can this city slow down? No. Can minibus drivers slow down? No. Slowing down would take away their business. They can only make a 'good' living by running a few rounds more.
So, to improve safety on minibuses, just install the safety devices used on roller coasters. Everybody must be secured safely before our mini-roller coasters race through our busy streets and highways. How's that for a change to the old idea of safety?
Life is super-busy in Hong Kong and everybody is trying to make the most out of every minute: to sleep yet another minute, to finish the work at hand, to earn a few dollars more before they go to their next appointment. And the minibus driver is there to make up the extra minute you have lost.
You should thank such a transport system, and such daring drivers. You curse them first or the second time you are swerved from one side to another on your seat. But soon, you get used to the speed and you even learn to enjoy the thrill and exhilaration. Carpe diem. (seize the day!)
Everybody coming to make a living in Hong Kong is making use of every single second to 'contribute' to the wealth of this city. Everybody is working overtime and everybody is thankful for the fast transport, the MTR, the minibus ... for getting them to their destinations in the shortest time, and not the tram or the ferry where tourists can leisurely enjoy the scenery outside the window.
Can this city slow down? No. Can minibus drivers slow down? No. Slowing down would take away their business. They can only make a 'good' living by running a few rounds more.
So, to improve safety on minibuses, just install the safety devices used on roller coasters. Everybody must be secured safely before our mini-roller coasters race through our busy streets and highways. How's that for a change to the old idea of safety?
Zachary
Ng Kwok-keung, Mei Foo
Q
How can the city best 'green' urban areas?
Friday,
04 November, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/523372
When the government is talking about greening the urban environment, I want to ask if it means just a bit of cosmetic work or if it really means business? Does it have a vision in mind? Is it prepared to sacrifice business for a better quality of life?
The best greening would be done with money. Without this, nothing is possible. The government can learn from what most Europeans are doing and what delights visitors so much. They hang potted plants outside flat windows and off lamp posts. It may sound silly, as nowadays most buildings have windows that cannot be opened or are closed all year round, but what the government can do is build a little concrete extension outside every old building.
And for new buildings, they can insist such extensions be included in the blueprint before they are approved.
These little concrete beds for plants should have water pipes leading to them so the plants can be sprayed with water, liquid fertilisers and insecticides.
The kinds of plants should be chosen and provided by the experts working in the government. They should be plants that would not endanger the structure of the building and are easy to maintain.
I have seen this design in quite a few government buildings in Tsuen Wan, some hotels and on big private estates.
Some of these plants are managed by the flat owners themselves and some centrally by the management.
I am happy that many residents in the estate I live in are making good use of the flower beds and greening my place.
I know, the whole thing may seem like too much work. But that is just because our government was too short-sighted when it uprooted almost all the trees and plants in our city in its haste to develop it in the early years. Remedial work is always painful and slow. But it is a price we must pay.
Just as Tung Chee-hwa was willing to subsidise taxi drivers to shift to use cleaner fuel to improve the quality of our air, so our new leader must take more drastic action to green our city and make our home more beautiful.
When the government is talking about greening the urban environment, I want to ask if it means just a bit of cosmetic work or if it really means business? Does it have a vision in mind? Is it prepared to sacrifice business for a better quality of life?
The best greening would be done with money. Without this, nothing is possible. The government can learn from what most Europeans are doing and what delights visitors so much. They hang potted plants outside flat windows and off lamp posts. It may sound silly, as nowadays most buildings have windows that cannot be opened or are closed all year round, but what the government can do is build a little concrete extension outside every old building.
And for new buildings, they can insist such extensions be included in the blueprint before they are approved.
These little concrete beds for plants should have water pipes leading to them so the plants can be sprayed with water, liquid fertilisers and insecticides.
The kinds of plants should be chosen and provided by the experts working in the government. They should be plants that would not endanger the structure of the building and are easy to maintain.
I have seen this design in quite a few government buildings in Tsuen Wan, some hotels and on big private estates.
Some of these plants are managed by the flat owners themselves and some centrally by the management.
I am happy that many residents in the estate I live in are making good use of the flower beds and greening my place.
I know, the whole thing may seem like too much work. But that is just because our government was too short-sighted when it uprooted almost all the trees and plants in our city in its haste to develop it in the early years. Remedial work is always painful and slow. But it is a price we must pay.
Just as Tung Chee-hwa was willing to subsidise taxi drivers to shift to use cleaner fuel to improve the quality of our air, so our new leader must take more drastic action to green our city and make our home more beautiful.
Zachary Ng Kwok-keung, Mei
Foo
Could more be done to help cyclists? : Tuesday, 15 November, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/524988
One characteristic of Hong
Kong is its limited space. When this city was developed, city planners never
thought some crazy villagers would cycle all the way from one remote spot to
another just for fun or for exercise. Cycling as a sports activity doesn't have
a long history in Hong Kong.
Cycling used to be for people working for grocery stores delivering heavy goods such as rice, kerosene and later gas to people living in the old districts such as Shamshuipo.
It is still a very favoured means of transport for people living in the New Territories whose abode is not within walking distance to the light rail or train stations. You can see bicycles parked every morning near these stations.
You can also see bicycle paths in Yuen Long and Tai Po, places where residents cycle a great deal. As for mountain or dirt-biking, there are, though few, designated areas where cyclists can take their bikes there to have fun during their holidays.
So, can one criticise the government for not doing enough to guarantee the safety of cyclists. I am sure the government has definitely given a lot of thought to protecting the cyclists and is not discriminating against them.
However, as traffic is getting more dense and our city more polluted, a move to respond to the greening of our city should be an appropriate step. Allowing non-polluting vehicles such as bicycles and electric vehicles is one such step. But I don't think the government has any intention of doing so. I can smell the petrol and diesel fumes from my 12th-floor bedroom. I know the government has business and commerce in mind, and time and speed in travelling means money. But can it start to think of its citizens' health now? Can the people living on The Peak start thinking of those living down below? Can they make commuting fun and living in the city a pleasure.
I really enjoy the cool fresh air in the city centres of Singapore and Malaysia and most European cities where governments have the determination to keep the air clean for their citizens. I really hope our government can green the city.
Cycling used to be for people working for grocery stores delivering heavy goods such as rice, kerosene and later gas to people living in the old districts such as Shamshuipo.
It is still a very favoured means of transport for people living in the New Territories whose abode is not within walking distance to the light rail or train stations. You can see bicycles parked every morning near these stations.
You can also see bicycle paths in Yuen Long and Tai Po, places where residents cycle a great deal. As for mountain or dirt-biking, there are, though few, designated areas where cyclists can take their bikes there to have fun during their holidays.
So, can one criticise the government for not doing enough to guarantee the safety of cyclists. I am sure the government has definitely given a lot of thought to protecting the cyclists and is not discriminating against them.
However, as traffic is getting more dense and our city more polluted, a move to respond to the greening of our city should be an appropriate step. Allowing non-polluting vehicles such as bicycles and electric vehicles is one such step. But I don't think the government has any intention of doing so. I can smell the petrol and diesel fumes from my 12th-floor bedroom. I know the government has business and commerce in mind, and time and speed in travelling means money. But can it start to think of its citizens' health now? Can the people living on The Peak start thinking of those living down below? Can they make commuting fun and living in the city a pleasure.
I really enjoy the cool fresh air in the city centres of Singapore and Malaysia and most European cities where governments have the determination to keep the air clean for their citizens. I really hope our government can green the city.
Zachary
Ng Kwok-keung, Mei Foo
Q
Do we need pet parks? Wednesday, 26 October, 2005, 12:00am http://www.scmp.com/node/522132
I am not a pet lover and I don't have a need for a pet park. But whether I need one or not, I see pets on the streets, on the upper podium of the private estate where I live, around the school building where I teach. I see droppings and can detect the foul smell left most mornings and evenings.
So what can we do but say 'hi' to these dog owners, secretly hoping that they will take their dogs farther away from where we work and live. I curse them when I and my children are playing ball or badminton as our balls or shuttlecocks may fall on where these pets just urinated or made their droppings. There is really nothing we can do about it.
How nice it would be if there was somewhere big where dog owners could take their dogs for a stroll and urinate. It would not only do them good, it would improve the hygiene of where we live and work.
We must not be miserly and think only of the money we will pay to build the parks, or the land that can be used for other more useful purposes.
We must understand that money spent on building pet parks is actually doing us good. We will have a cleaner environment for ourselves because if the pet parks are easily accessible, beautiful and user-friendly enough, pet owners will love to take their pets there to meet other pets too.
Their pets will no longer be using our places as their toilet. Pet lovers will have no excuse for their selfish behaviour of letting their dogs foul the street or private housing estate. The cleaning-up will be a lot easier and the cost of cleaning will be much lower as the problem is concentrated in one place instead of being spread around.
There will be fewer conflicts among tenants living in the same building. The play area will really belong to the children and there will be less chance of them getting allergies from the hair of the animals.
I am not a pet lover and I don't have a need for a pet park. But whether I need one or not, I see pets on the streets, on the upper podium of the private estate where I live, around the school building where I teach. I see droppings and can detect the foul smell left most mornings and evenings.
So what can we do but say 'hi' to these dog owners, secretly hoping that they will take their dogs farther away from where we work and live. I curse them when I and my children are playing ball or badminton as our balls or shuttlecocks may fall on where these pets just urinated or made their droppings. There is really nothing we can do about it.
How nice it would be if there was somewhere big where dog owners could take their dogs for a stroll and urinate. It would not only do them good, it would improve the hygiene of where we live and work.
We must not be miserly and think only of the money we will pay to build the parks, or the land that can be used for other more useful purposes.
We must understand that money spent on building pet parks is actually doing us good. We will have a cleaner environment for ourselves because if the pet parks are easily accessible, beautiful and user-friendly enough, pet owners will love to take their pets there to meet other pets too.
Their pets will no longer be using our places as their toilet. Pet lovers will have no excuse for their selfish behaviour of letting their dogs foul the street or private housing estate. The cleaning-up will be a lot easier and the cost of cleaning will be much lower as the problem is concentrated in one place instead of being spread around.
There will be fewer conflicts among tenants living in the same building. The play area will really belong to the children and there will be less chance of them getting allergies from the hair of the animals.
Zachary
Ng Kwok-keung, Mei Foo
Q
Do we need pet parks? http://www.scmp.com/node/521829
Pets,
especially dogs and cats, are for bigger countries, but not Hong Kong. Hong
Kong is too small. Here, we have buildings with 30-40 floors, busy roads and a
quick social pace. It is impossible and unnecessary to own pets in Hong Kong.
Usually,city-dwellers do not have time to take care of pets. Dogs and cats are only allowed to stay in a small flat. Besides, there are many abandoned animals.
The establishment of a pet park will aggravate the problem of increasing the number of people who own animals and then dump animals. Some may argue that the number of people who own pets is not equal to the number of people who abandon them. But according to the data from the Society of Abandoned Animals, it shows there is a trend towards dumping animals. So, a pet park would only aggravate the problem.
Pet owners are only a small number of people in Hong Kong. Should we sacrifice limited land for so few people? Land in Hong Kong is limited and expensive. Obviously, it is ridiculous to build a park for pets but not for humans.
There is another proposal: instead of opening the whole area to animals, the government can designate a small area in parks for them. Nevertheless, it is still difficult to mark park boundaries between humans and animals.
Many people in Hong Kong do not like animals or avoid close contact with them. In Hong Kong, air is polluted. Allergies are developed easily. Some people may cough and sneeze when they approach animals, especially those with long hair. Should these people be included in our consideration? People suffering from allergies should expose themselves more to fresh air. It would be difficult for them to encounter cats and dogs around them even in a park, where it is the best and only place for them to take some deep breaths. It would be a selfish deed to establish a pet park in the heart of a city. There are thousands of proposals for the West Kowloon cultural hub, but it is for sure that establishment of a pet park is not the best one. This idea should be dropped before arousing too much controversy. Cherie Ng, Tsuen Wan
Usually,city-dwellers do not have time to take care of pets. Dogs and cats are only allowed to stay in a small flat. Besides, there are many abandoned animals.
The establishment of a pet park will aggravate the problem of increasing the number of people who own animals and then dump animals. Some may argue that the number of people who own pets is not equal to the number of people who abandon them. But according to the data from the Society of Abandoned Animals, it shows there is a trend towards dumping animals. So, a pet park would only aggravate the problem.
Pet owners are only a small number of people in Hong Kong. Should we sacrifice limited land for so few people? Land in Hong Kong is limited and expensive. Obviously, it is ridiculous to build a park for pets but not for humans.
There is another proposal: instead of opening the whole area to animals, the government can designate a small area in parks for them. Nevertheless, it is still difficult to mark park boundaries between humans and animals.
Many people in Hong Kong do not like animals or avoid close contact with them. In Hong Kong, air is polluted. Allergies are developed easily. Some people may cough and sneeze when they approach animals, especially those with long hair. Should these people be included in our consideration? People suffering from allergies should expose themselves more to fresh air. It would be difficult for them to encounter cats and dogs around them even in a park, where it is the best and only place for them to take some deep breaths. It would be a selfish deed to establish a pet park in the heart of a city. There are thousands of proposals for the West Kowloon cultural hub, but it is for sure that establishment of a pet park is not the best one. This idea should be dropped before arousing too much controversy. Cherie Ng, Tsuen Wan
Q
Do we need pet parks? http://www.scmp.com/node/521970
I
was extremely surprised by the ignorance and insensitivity at the
comments made by Cherie Ng (Talkback, yesterday) regarding pet parks in Hong
Kong. Dogs and cats are not just for
bigger countries; dogs and cats don't really care where they live; all they want
is just our love and they give unconditional love and companionship to human
beings.
To say 'it is impossible and unnecessary to own pets in HK' is an extremely uneducated and ignorant comment and I must say there should be heaps of animal-lovers out there who would agree with me.
Hong Kong people are so stressed out, busy at making money every minute of the day, pets are one of the wonderful remedies for depression, nervous tension and they are great friends for the lonely and the aged.
I believe there are a lot of animal-lovers in Hong Kong and, as Ms Ng said, there is limited space for animals. Isn't that a good reason to have some parks that we can spend some relaxing and precious time with our beloved pets? Having pet parks would provide pet lovers with a place to get together and exercise their pets but wouldn't necessarily worsen the animal-dumping problem.
I am an Australian living in Hong Kong. I had problems adjusting to the crazy lifestyle here and I developed depression. My husband bought me a cute little puppy, Max, and he is my whole world now. He saved my sanity!
Animal abandonment happens globally. It is nothing to do with the size of the country, it is to do with each individual. It is not an excuse not to have pet parks.
I can see that Ms Ng definitely is not an animal-lover. I am not sure how Ms Ng can say 'pet owners are only a small number in Hong Kong' if she has absolutely no contact with people like us who treat our pets as family members.
Yes, land in Hong Kong is limited and expensive as she said, but haven't the big construction companies made enough money from building those 'small shoe boxes' for us and our pets to live in? Shouldn't we have some sort of facilities that we can share with our beloved pets outside those 'shoe boxes'?
Generalising that 'many people in Hong Kong do not like animals or avoid close contact with them because of allergies' shows even more that the writer is living in her own little bubble. Allergies happen all over the world. People are allergic to food, animals, air, fragrances. How can you just blame animals?
Ms Ng said 'the idea of having pet parks in Hong Kong should be dropped before arousing too much controversy'. I believe her comments have already aroused tonnes of controversy from pet-lovers all over the world, including myself. Mayne Harding
To say 'it is impossible and unnecessary to own pets in HK' is an extremely uneducated and ignorant comment and I must say there should be heaps of animal-lovers out there who would agree with me.
Hong Kong people are so stressed out, busy at making money every minute of the day, pets are one of the wonderful remedies for depression, nervous tension and they are great friends for the lonely and the aged.
I believe there are a lot of animal-lovers in Hong Kong and, as Ms Ng said, there is limited space for animals. Isn't that a good reason to have some parks that we can spend some relaxing and precious time with our beloved pets? Having pet parks would provide pet lovers with a place to get together and exercise their pets but wouldn't necessarily worsen the animal-dumping problem.
I am an Australian living in Hong Kong. I had problems adjusting to the crazy lifestyle here and I developed depression. My husband bought me a cute little puppy, Max, and he is my whole world now. He saved my sanity!
Animal abandonment happens globally. It is nothing to do with the size of the country, it is to do with each individual. It is not an excuse not to have pet parks.
I can see that Ms Ng definitely is not an animal-lover. I am not sure how Ms Ng can say 'pet owners are only a small number in Hong Kong' if she has absolutely no contact with people like us who treat our pets as family members.
Yes, land in Hong Kong is limited and expensive as she said, but haven't the big construction companies made enough money from building those 'small shoe boxes' for us and our pets to live in? Shouldn't we have some sort of facilities that we can share with our beloved pets outside those 'shoe boxes'?
Generalising that 'many people in Hong Kong do not like animals or avoid close contact with them because of allergies' shows even more that the writer is living in her own little bubble. Allergies happen all over the world. People are allergic to food, animals, air, fragrances. How can you just blame animals?
Ms Ng said 'the idea of having pet parks in Hong Kong should be dropped before arousing too much controversy'. I believe her comments have already aroused tonnes of controversy from pet-lovers all over the world, including myself. Mayne Harding
No comments:
Post a Comment