Dear Editor,
I am writing to express my opinions to the pedestrianisation policy in Sai Yeung Choi Street in Mong Kok. There has been an increasing number of street performers doing cultural or promotional activities and they often bring entertainment to the pedestrian.
The pedestrianisation policy has stirred up so much controversy among the city, since this policy is contributed to different groups of stakeholders, even every Hong Kong people will be contributed in it.
The district councilors voted 24 for, with one abstention, to limit the pedestrian zone to weekends and public holidays on 10 December in response to complaints from the resident who are unhappy about the growing number of performers and hawkers on the street. In the councilor’s opinion, the most concern of them is to balance the voice of people on the street The decision made is certainly conformed to most of the stakeholders-residents, shop owners, pedestrian and tourists.
First of all, there is a hostile of consensus among the residents toward the pedestrianisation policy. Continual noise and crowds from the street performer bring them nuisance, which may cause insommia to them. Since they may not have enough rest, it will easily lead them to depression or anxiety. This will finally affect their health if the situation occurs continually. This will also affect their work performance or study. Moreover, the crowds on the street can be a danger to the residents, also the pedestrian walk nearby. Yau Tsim Mong District Council’s traffic and transport committee member review that an elderly woman told him that she couldn’t get medical help as the ambulance couldn’t get though the jammed street. This reflects the danger of jammed street to the urgent needed people nearby.
For the shop owners, there are different viewpoints towards the pedestrianisation policy. Some shop owners welcome the policy because it can attract more people to the street, and hence to the shop. Because of this, they can earn more money. While some shop owners think the pedestrians may block the entrance and occupy some pavement. This may affect the desire of shopping of some customers and reversibly disturb the business.
On the other hand, the street performers stand on the side of endorsement, as the people-only streets can provide a stage for them to do performances and it is a platform for them to make their dreams come true. The performers who may not have the chance to show off themselves on television, can show their talents on the street.
There are also various views among the pedestrians towards the issue. For some leisure pedestrians, they think that the street performers can bring more entertainment to the pedestrians, which can light up the atmosphere and also bring peace to them. However, for the pedestrian in a hurry may be dissatisfied about the blockage of road. They will be resisted by the blocking of road.
Lastly, the tourists give support to the pedestrianisation policy. They think the street performance is one of the characteristics of Hong Kong and it can show the local culture to them. If they are going to close this all the heart in Hong Kong, it would affect the culture in Hong Kong. Therefore, they vote for the support to the pedestrianisation policy. To conclude, since the policy contributes to different groups of stakeholders, I also think that the government should balance all their opinions, especially the most influencing stakeholders by the policy. I think the most influencing stakeholders are the residents as they may live there for a whole life. The government should put the most concern on them.
To balance different groups of people’s interests, I think limit pedestrian-only zone in Mong Kok to weekends and holidays is a good measurement. Since the street performers can till perform on street and show their talents, and the local culture can be sustained while the residents and shop owners will have a better livelihood and be less annoyed from the crowded street performances.
Yours sincerely,
Chris Chan