« You Can't Turn Your Back ... | Main | Optimism Must Win In The End »

16 June 2017

Comments

John D

Thank you for this post, David.

Yes, Jake did indeed make many good points in his article about Uber, the major one to me being the existence of the "rotten borough" electoral system in which the owners of those companies that hold speculative positions in some of the 18,000 taxi licences that the government sets as a limit for issue are so important in our electoral system that the current Chief Executive of Hong Kong seems to offer them an inordinate amount of respect.

In this context, I seem to remember that a certain Governor Patten (a very well politically connected individual with whom I became personally acquainted during his time in office here, and for whom I developed - and currently maintain - no respect whatsoever) appointed one Maria Tam to be chairman of our Transport Advisory Committee, notwithstanding her extremely close links to the taxi trade.

Was that appointment a political trade off, or simple stupidity?

Anyway, back to the point, which is that the solution to the taxi/Uber situation is very apparent and existing legislation could easily cover it, if anyone in the current HKSAR government had the moral fibre to go for such a thing.

Then there is the matter of the seeming clowns in the so-called "pan democratic movement" a number of whom have been taking rather a lot of money from various sources (including sources based in the United States)to undermine Hong Kong's stability: if our legislature does not allow the passage of our own Article 23 national security legislation quite soon, the Standing Committee of the NPC is quite likely to interpret the Basic Law so as to apply the corresponding national law to Hong Kong.

Will that be a good thing, or what? But perhaps that is what the backers of the clowns want.

But in the context of Basic Law matters, just where was Hong Kong Bank during the discussions that began in 1985? The Bank was very influential then, it must have had very considerable input.

I really do wonder just what that input was.

Best wishes.

David Eldon

As always, pertinent and thought provoking comments for which many thanks. I am afraid our own city jigsaw has many pieces missing right now and you are right, if we don't find them in due course some will find them for us.
As for the Bank input of 30 years ago - to which I certainly was not privy - I can only say that "input" does not necessarily amount to either agreement or implementation.

Alan Petts

Recently 'discovered' your log/posts. Interesting views and as an ex career expat myself (including hkcc squashCosmo hockey etc) I can align with many. Regards from Liz and Alan Petts

The comments to this entry are closed.