LETTER TO SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST:
I must weigh in on the Fanling golf course debate. I am not a member of the Fanling Club, nor am I a golfer. However, I am a long-term resident of Hong Kong; I care about our public assets of which the Fanling green belt is an ancient and valued part. If it were destroyed for housing it would provide so few dwellings that I doubt it would be even a decimal point rounding error in our needs. Yet a green asset gone forever.
I agree with one of your earlier correspondents who said that to destroy Fanling is an act of "vandalism”. It would also be an act by philistines. Covering Fanling in concrete would be the act of a government smugly indifferent to our cultural heritage.
Reader Arun Garg quotes the closure of golf courses in the United States in support of his contention that destroying Fanling "makes sense" ("Given chronic land shortage, it makes sense to use golf course in Fanling for public housing", January 28).
But the US still has over 15,000 courses, one for every 22,000 people. That's 55 times more golf courses per capita than we have: just six courses for seven million people. Destroying Fanling destroys 17% of them, vs 1.3% closed in the US. Hardly a fair comparison, Mr Garg.
The government says it is committed to promoting sports in HK especially youth sports. Fanling supporters have pointed out that the Club regularly promotes Open Days, public golf and youth events, attended by many thousands of our residents. The HK Open at Fanling is the most popular on the worldwide PGA tour and is attended by tens of thousands of Hongkongers. So Arun Garg's comment that "it makes no sense that interests of very few should override those of the majority" is exactly upside down. The Club is for the many; accommodation for the few.
Despite all this the government is seriously considering dismembering Fanling? For a tiny number of new dwellings and to appease the barely concealed envy driving Fanling critics?
Here's a thought: if the government really thinks golf is just for the elite (though it's not), take over the land when the lease is up and convert it to a public park. That at least would be better than housing for the few: itself an act of vandalism committed by philistines.
In short: No, it doesn't "make sense", Mr Garg.
Free Fanling!
Pf etc …
Why housing on Fanling golf course is a logical choice
https://sc.mp/n2lrh
https://sc.mp/n2lrh
