South China Morning Post
Advertisement
Advertisement
Hong Kong MTR
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
Garbage and debris lie at a blockaded entrance to Sheung Wan MTR station on November 2. Photo: Bloomberg
OpinionLetters

Letters | Why Hong Kong MTR may remain a target of protester fury even if ‘curfew hours’ are lifted

  • The rail operator’s status as a government-controlled company is what renders it vulnerable to attacks, which happened even before service hours were shortened to limit damage and facilitate repairs
Hong Kong MTR
Letters
Letters
Why you can trust SCMP
The spokesman for passenger concern group Public Transport Research Team must be living on another planet. He claims that if the MTR ends the practice of closing services early in a “de facto curfew”, the attacks on its stations will stop (“50 MTR entrances to be fortified against vandalism”, November 4).

The MTR was attacked when it maintained services at normal hours.

It was attacked when it cut short services.

The shorter-hours policy was put into place so that the rail operator could have more time to repair damage caused to the stations. If the policy has a side-effect of convincing people to go home earlier, then so be it.

Does the spokesman honestly believe that the attacks will stop if the MTR stops cooperating with the government?

The MTR, as a government-controlled company, is an obvious target for mindless rioters. These imbeciles will not stop attacking the MTR because they now take obvious delight in smashing up ticket machines, turnstiles and customer service booths.

They smash them up because they want to look tough. As long as their so-called five demands are not met, they will continue to attack high-profile targets such as police stations, government buildings, traffic lights, mainland-owned businesses, and so on. The MTR is an easy target, its facilities are everywhere, and media coverage is guaranteed, so why not trash it?

Protesters’ demands that the MTR stop cooperating with the police are akin to demanding that the London Underground, which is a publicly-owned body, not cooperate with the British Transport Police, the dedicated unit for policing transport systems in the UK.

Which situation would the spokesman prefer: widespread inconvenience due to a crippled subway system because of severe damage to stations, or a subway system that can still manage as close to normal service as possible, albeit for slightly shorter hours?

I know which one I prefer.

Danny Chung, Tai Po

Post