Dear Electors,
My name is David Chan, Candidate No 4 for the AS&P functional constituency.
I am running this on a platform of
sustainable development and conservation which affects our future, in particular our children future and the younger generations. The leaflets outline some of the main issues and would be very please if you do take a little of your time in reading it. The issues of global warming really is a lot more serious than most of us think and lead to believed. Unfortunately, my works does mean I need to do quite a bit of research into this topic and the more I do that the more I can see this as a problem that is not going to go away. The prospect of some part of
Hong Kong being under water is really a possible reality that could happen within our lifetime.
So hence, my reason to run, that I would try in getting this message across for the changes needed, to make a better
Hong Kong. That if we can really stop or slow this global warming process down, I can say to my children when they grown, that what we have done now have improve their future.
On Sustainability - I will be pushing for changes to the legislation and the introduction of sustainable building codes, Currently the Environmental Bureau (EB) have completed the public consultation and will be looking at how this could be implemented with a view of taking this to
LegCo. The issue being the is primarily a EB/
EMSD initiative and we know that there is an another side of this which is for building. The Buildings Department have launch a voluntary code,
CEPAS, Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme For Building. While this is quite a detail documents, the take up rate for using this has being disappointing.
I think the way forward is for this or part of this to become
mandatory.
It is worth noting that an environmental labeling system does not itself created green buildings, but just that by labeling sustainability, it that does provide consumer a choice when they buy or rent premises. The choice would be put to the consumers so that like buying a fridge or an Air-conditioning, you will have a clear label so that you know how energy efficient your building really is.
There is a separate exercise that is also required to
amend the current building regulations and code of practices to international level so that better energy efficiency can be achieve, simple things like insulation windows with a performance driven energy requirements. In fact it is the time really to review the whole Building Ordinance totally so that it better reflect the design and construction requirements of modern times. Compare to other countries we are really quite behind. The
recent problem with fire safety for example, further highlight the imminent need for changes to our understanding and implementation, and enforcement of fire safety, we should also be considering looking at a more performance basis systems.
On Conservation of our heritage
Conservation is part and parcel with sustainability and affect ours and the next generations. Ultimately what we do decide to destroy as part of our heritage now will mean those in the future will never be able to touch, feel and experience and that will be forever! The key message is that many parts of
Hong Kong including Central,
Wanchai has reached saturation point in its development and destruction of its heritage. It is quite obvious the condition of traffic in
Hong Kong Island are congested and will remain so, even with the new proposed P2 bypass that has resulted in the lost of two of our most important heritage landmark, Star Ferry and Queens Pier, both now only exist truly in our collective memories.
If we continue at this unabated development rates,
traffic congestion can only get worst,
air quality further deteriorate, heat island effect increases, the city will get hotter, pollutant level higher and overall living and working conditions worsen.At Mid-levels and Central we simply cannot build any higher with the current infrastructure and only the last remnants of the area's heritage remain - if you destroy these, then there is none left and
Hong Kong will be lifeless as a chain of one mega shopping centre to another. Is that really what we want
Hong Kong to be, a soulless city for shoppers?
For instance there is a great deal of anger and concern at
URA's proposal on
wanchai and central which will likely increase alienation and disaffection in the community against the government and the
URA who will be seen as mainly enriching developers while destroying
Hong Kong's heritage, destroying existing communities and destroying some of the most wonderful icon of
Hong Kong which is loved by tourists and local people. I meet a lot of people from overseas, from international finance, expats and heads of large international companies, many are quite certain that places such as SOHO,
Wanchai market are things that made people love
Hong Kong and want to live here.
We are about to destroy more of these for short term profit replace with Disney style theme park shops, more high towers and again yet more shopping centres. We already have a Disney style Star Ferry, do we really want more?
Will people still comes to Hong Kong for just gimmicks and shopping alone?
Professional Unity - one thing I have learnt is that there is a difference of opinions that had lead to really quite a degree of disagreement between the various institutes of AS&P. Primary this has been between architects and planners and the surveyors. It is interesting to note that this should not be happening because in the commercial world the various members of what we do actually compliment each others. That is almost all projects consist of Surveyor, Architects, Planners and Landscape architect at some stage of the design, construction and in fact over a building cycle. I believe there could be better way for us to work more closer together in particularly when under a
LegCo who represent is, this should be the case, rather than architect will always side on architects, surveyors to surveyors, planner to planners etc. The voice of some of the smaller institutes such as Planners in fact and within surveyors the BS and Land surveyors should also be represented.
Overall I do believe in one man one vote and eventually the functional
constituency will need to fall in line with what has been given in the time frame under the basic law under the principle of one man one vote. Until then we could do a lot more as "Professional" and a lot lot more for our environment. In many universities, the fact that Architectural, Surveying and Planning are all under the faculties of the Environment speaks for the fact that is really what we do.
Politically we need to think more that we are a city, a city within China that has a a high degree of autonomy, we are not a country so should not be driven politically or aspire to be one. As professional it is our duty to explain the benefits and problems when we build and develop onto our fragile environment.
I hope the future will be for all of us working together for a better world for us and our children we can all share as goal for a better future, in the end do we really want to be seen as elitist group of a little over 6000 plus of different disciplines and groups who cannot even agreed
amongst themselves, particularly over important issues of conservation and
environment. How can we as professional expect public support when we have fail them. We can continue to sit sit inside the small circle and continue to debate and scheming over the next best to protect the personal interest.
In the end, the final choice for the Electors
are really between "conservatives", "liberals" or in the "middle of the road", those that "
bends like a willow tree" or will "speak out" for the people:
So do you want a
LegCo member who will delivered more of the same as before or do you want something very different, like
putting environmental and conservation right up front as part of his political agenda, Look closely at the all the mail which you have, you will see unity, create business opportunity, promote professionalism, cultivate young talents etc etc. To me these are not platform but prerequisite to anyone who is standing for
LegCo, why would anyone standing should want to state the obvious, which if you remember 4 years ago the statements are much the same as last time round.
It is like calling ourselves honest, trustworthy, dependable, professional. Is this not given?
Would you elect anyone who is not?
Attached is my original election platform and a couple of recent articles on
sustainability features on the newspapers FYI. Some of my thoughts I have also put under my blog:
http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/The Key I think is not to over promise of everything under the sun and giving a whole list of promises and can
do's, which if you count them one by one, the question must be can this really be achievable within the next few years? Can anyone really do all that under a
LegCo system with limited power and authority - a
LegCo where as a Law maker, he or she can only passes laws that are put forward by the government, giving that one vote amongst many? We do need to be realistic, in promising the earth, this can only lead to future disappointments to their electors. but then he will already be in for a term and reach that goal.
For me doing 2 things:
Sustainability and Conservation, if I can just do these two tasks and do them well, I am certain we will already have a better Hong Kong for all of us.
I do look forward to your support, please support a better sustainable, greener
Hong Kong.
Best Regards
David Chan - Candidate No 4 http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
.jpg){kind=link}