Britain's tragic rape of Hong Kong

Hong Kong has been plundered for 150 years by the British and from 
July 1 it is China’s turn. The cost of the rampant free-enterprise has 
been borne by the well-being - or not - of flora, fauna and human health. 


The air is near unbreathable on Hong Kong Island, the whole territory is
 cloaked in a pall of regional haze, there are no planning regulations and
 no controls on vehicle pollution. Sewage and all manner of industrial
 waste chemicals are pumped into the waters surrounding the British
 Colony.


The famous White Dolphins are far less commonly sighted than they
 once were partly because whole mountains are ripped down for land
 reclamation, for offices and apartment blocks, first destroying terrestrial
 environments in order to then destroy marine environments. 


Environmentalists in the British colony fear that Beijing will treat its new
 Special Administrative Region in precisely the same way as Britain has
 treated its colony - a small speck at the bottom right of the map spinning
 great revenues, subsidised by the environment. The only hope is that
 China might place environmental values higher than the outgoing masters have.

"It can’t be worse under the Chinese than under the British," said
 several environmentalists.

"Anything that you could possibly do to harm a dolphin, we do it here in
 Hong Kong," says marine biologist Lindsay Porter of the Swire Institute
 of Marine Science. The raw sewage and chemical wastes pumped into
 the seas, along with over-fishing and vast shipping traffic are among 
life’s challenges for the famous White Dolphins (sousa chinensis) -
 ironically, the emblem for the takeover.  


"If the fishermen with their high tech trawling and sonar equipment can’t
 find fish, then neither can dolphins," Ms Porter said.


"What will happen when the gweiloh [European expatriates] go?"
 exclaimed a leading Hong Kong Chinese environmentalist, referring to
 the majority of staff at Friends of the Earth and World Wide Fund for
 Nature in Hong Kong.

On Lamma Island, Action for a Better Living Environment (ABLE) ran an
 all-day 'Earth Power'  rock concert on the beach below Hong Kong’s
 main power station and sponsored by the Hong Kong Electric 
Company, South China Brewing Company and Swire. But ABLE is
 virtually all-gweiloh. 

Instead of protecting the important internationally-listed Mai Po wetlands 
on the border with the People's Republic of China, proposals for the 
development of a golf course and several massive apartment blocks are being considered. Development proposals are rarely rejected. Historic
 buildings like the Hong Kong Club in Central Hong Kong are ripped
 down for more profitable skyscrapers.


An estimated 150 immigrants arrive from China each day - 55,000 a year 
- requiring accommodation and the pressure for "reclaiming" land is
 immense.


Nevertheless, a stunning array of butterfly and bird life survives, most 
notably the large kites hovering over the islands and the skyscrapers of 
Central, looking for something to scavenge. An Australian doctor on a 
tour of the Mai Po wetlands recorded 47 different bird species in five 
hours.

But Dr Ng Cho Nam, who led the birdwatchers' group and is the 
chairman of the Hong Kong Conservancy Association, said that rather 
than reflecting any good environmental health in Hong Kong, many of 
the birds were refugees from even worse conditions across the border.
 The Australian doctor said he generally records about 100 species per
 excursion in Australia.

Across the wetlands, through the thick, polluted air, Chinese 
development looms large. A fisherman can be seen illegally operating 
on the Chinese side of the no man's land/Ramsar-site. Shooting 
expeditions have taken place on the Chinese side of the wetlands, 
leading to questions of the nature of people allowed to have guns and 
travel so freely in a border region of the People's Republic of China. 


Listening to the colonial authorities, one would think that no-one was to 
blame for the tragic state of Hong Kong's environmental health. The 
deputy director of Environment, Anthony Cooper says he has tried to do 
the right thing, but the Legislative Council - a partially-elected chamber
 - has prevented important changes being introduced. 


Blaming the Legislative Council is an interesting response. The Civil 
Service is the government of Hong Kong - answerable to London - and
 has had 150 years in power. It only recently addressed the issue of 
pumping raw sewage into the sea and while the reform program is 
admirable, it is somewhat late. 

But the failure to deal with air pollution - blamed on the Legislative 
Council - is reprehensible. While much of Hong Kong's marine pollution
 is now coming down the Pearl River Estuary from China, Hong Kong 
has made it's own sizeable contribution to the heavy metals, chemicals
 and general garbage that constitute too much of the South China Sea.


The Legislative Council was created by the ruling authority, the United 
Kingdom, and failing the environment is just a symptom of an inherent 
design fault.

Of the 60 Legislative Council members, only 20 were what could be 
called democratically-elected and the rest are elected to protect and 
defend their local, professional or industrial interests. Pressure to protect
 the environment comes primarily from independent and Democratic 
Party members who will not be represented in the incoming Provisional
 Legislature, appointed by Beijing.


There are no regulations demanding environmental impact assessments
 for major projects. Two islands, The Brothers, lying between the new
 airport on Lantau Island and Kowloon, were destroyed for landfill, under 
the claim that the small islands were in the road of the airport several 
kilometres away. It was ludicrous given the condition of the existing 
airport. A senior Environment Department civil servant said he didn't 
know any better, when accepting the story that the islands would 
interfere with the radar systems.


A 300 foot high mountain on Crown Land on Lamma Island south-west 
of Hong Kong Island has been mined for a cement works. The south 
face of the mountain was removed prior to my visit to the island, but the
 top came off in the few weeks that I was there. The civil servant said 
there was no need for permission from his department to remove the 
mountain, rather it would come from the quarries section of the Civil 
Engineering Department.


"Hopefully next year," he said when asked about the time frame for the
 introduction of environmental regulation. In the meantime, the mountain 
will have more of its crown removed for landfill or cement works, this
 time claiming that it is imperative to destroy more of the mountain so that 
it can be restored. Apparently the cement works has cut into the 
mountain so steeply that it cannot be saved. The newly mined material 
will pay for the re-afforestation programme, we are told.


The tragic plunder of Hong Kong's environment, as a forgotten 
consequence of development at any cost, can be quite disturbing to
 witness. And the mixed views on the future of Hong Kong after the 
Chinese take-over or "reunification" - are reflected in environmental 
concerns.


The thought that it "couldn't possibly be worse under the Chinese than 
it has been under the British" and that 1997 could be the saving grace
 for Hong Kong's environment, may need to be reviewed in the light of 
concerns over freedom of expression. China has already announced it 
will roll back human rights in Hong Kong and has long made it clear that
 it is not impressed with rowdy - or even very peaceful - demonstrations.


"To have an effective environment movement we need a credible free press, so that if the environment is damaged, people will know and 
be able to see and voice their concerns," says Dr Ng Cho Nam. 

"Without a free press, people will not know and they cannot complain if
 they see things go wrong."


Sadly, Hong Kong’s media are already cowering to Beijing and Reuters
 has left for the relative freedom of Singapore, claiming that it was an
 administrative decision and had nothing to do with threats to media
 independence under Chinese rule.


But Dr Ng, an associate professor of environmental physics at City
 University Hong Kong, has visited Beijing several times and is proud of
 his good contacts with the government of the People’s Republic of
 China. He believes some good can be achieved through quiet
 diplomacy, but is also aware that Hong Kong is a physically tiny part
 of the Chinese map and that Beijing’s interest is in its economy rather
 than ecology.


The newly-appointed Chief Executive, shipping magnate, Tung
 Chee-hwa, is unlikely to place any burdens on his fellow ship owners,
 who are responsible for much of Hong Kong's air and marine pollution.


 In one of his rare mentions of the environment, Mr Tung has said he
 wants to "review" the polluter-pays principle. Not an auspicious start.

And it is not as if the colony cannot afford tough environmental
 measures. Hong Kong is not poor. With $US57 billion in foreign
 reserves, it is amazingly rich.


Christine Loh, one of the 20 democratically-elected members of the
 outgoing Legislative Council says that GDP figures are what make
 governments look good. She says it is "amazing that such a rich place
 is only doing sewerage now".


Asked what will happen to the environment after July 1, Ms Loh noted a
 564 percent increase in container terminal capacity and said expanding
 ports meant more diesels and barges and as a consequence more
 noise and air pollution. 

She expects post-1997 Hong Kong will be infrastructure-focussed with
 little concern for humans.


If the present colonial authority merely imposed the (flawed and much
 criticised) environmental standards existing in Britain today, Hong Kong
 would be improved a thousand-fold. There is still time, but anything
 done now, like Governor Patten's very flawed Legislative Council, will
 merely be seen as a further provocation to China.



The future looks ... hazy.

ends text


Copyright David Langsam 1997
P.O. Box 5000 Carlton Victoria Australia 3053