Hong Kong can sustain its HK$2 transport scheme with 1 tweak
Published: 11:30am, 10 Feb 2025 Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form . Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification The HK$2 (26 US cents) public transport fare concession scheme for elderly residents faces sustainability challenges amid the current fiscal deficit. The scheme in its present form may not endure in the long run. A monthly cap offers one solution, but doesn't tackle rush-hour congestion . A more effective approach is to offer concessional fares during off-peak hours, excluding 8-10am and 5 -7pm to encourage the elderly to travel from 10am to 5pm.
This adjustment can significantly impact overcrowding during rush hour, as around 31 per cent of Hong Kong's population qualifies for the concession – a figure that is expected to rise with the ageing population. According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department, there were 2.36 million people aged 60 or older as of 2024.
The implementation can be straightforward, similar to the MTR's early bird discount, which already offers a 25 per cent fare reduction for early morning travel.
Reducing peak-hour ridership is critical in Hong Kong's fast-paced environment, where overcapacity can mean being late for work. This is particularly relevant for those who ride minibuses, where standing is prohibited, or trains on which doors don't initially shut properly. Encouraging off-peak travel also offers elderly passengers a safer, more comfortable journey with more available seating.
Another issue is misuse of the scheme. Between June 2023 and February 2024, over 4,200 rail passengers were fined for misuse, indicating the scheme's potential for exploitation. Bus and minibus misuse is harder to quantify but likely equally substantial. Shifting concessions to off-peak times would ease enforcement pressures during congested hours and deter misuse by removing exploitability at peak times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
HKFP
3 days ago
- HKFP
In Pictures: Hong Kong police deploy armoured vehicle in Causeway Bay on Tiananmen crackdown anniversary
Police have deployed an armoured vehicle in Hong Kong's commercial heart, amidst an ongoing heavy security presence on the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown. The 'Sabertooth' armoured vehicle was spotted on Great George Street in Causeway Bay on Wednesday afternoon, as groups of uniformed officers patrolled areas near Victoria Park, the former site of annual vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown in Beijing. Hundreds of police officers have also been deployed in Causeway Bay. Officers – both in uniform and plainclothes – are being stationed in the Causeway Bay MTR station, outside the Sogo department store, as well as in and around Victoria Park. Andrew Kan, deputy police commissioner for national security, made an appearance in Causeway Bay at around 5.05pm and walked around for about 10 minutes. Activist Lui Yuk-lin, nicknamed 'Female Long Hair,' was brought into a police van at 4.28pm, shortly after she exited the Causeway Bay MTR station. She clasped her palms in front of her chest without saying anything. It is unclear whether she was under arrest. In Victoria Park, a man holding an electric candle while sitting on a bench was surrounded by police officers at around 4.30pm. The man, wearing a face mask, a white cap, and dressed in black attire, was later brought to a police van. Police did not say whether he was apprehended. Shortly after 6pm, a woman holding up a small white flower on Great George Street was surrounded by police. They searched her belongings and escorted her away to the MTR station. Two women – including a girl holding flowers and wearing what appeared to be a school uniform – were taken into a police van in Victoria Park. Performance artist Chan Mei-tung appeared in Causeway Bay at around 7.15pm and told reporters that she was going to Victoria Park to swim. She was stopped by police as she was approaching the park in the rain and was taken away in a police van at 7.29pm. On Tuesday, Chan was stopped and searched by plainclothes officers outside Sogo, as she was chewing bubble gum. The Tiananmen crackdown occurred on June 4, 1989, ending months of student-led demonstrations in China. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People's Liberation Army cracked down on protesters in Beijing. Keith Yip, deputy police commissioner of operations, appeared in Victoria Park at around 7.45pm. A man stood silently in the rain at around 8pm. Minutes later, he was escorted by police and taken into a police van. Louis Doucet, head of press and communications at the French Consulate General in Hong Kong, walked through Victoria Park at around 8.20pm. Around 20 minutes later in the park, police questioned a man wearing a white T-shirt featuring a drawing of the Goddess of Democracy and a Chinese slogan saying, 'Vindication of June 4 Comes Closer and Closer,' before taking him into a police van. At around 9 pm, a man wearing a T-shirt saying 'Core Values of Socialism' was taken away by police in Victoria Park. Police did not say whether he was under arrest. He was also taken away during last year's Tiananmen crackdown anniversary. Just before 9 pm, a man wearing a headpiece that read 'Hong Kong Add Oil' in Chinese was stopped by police at the entrance of Fashion Walk in Causeway Bay and later led into a police van. His dog had on a collared decorated with yellow ribbons and the Chinese word for 'persist.' Two female journalists – one working for Yahoo News and the other for local media outlet The Collective – said they were questioned by police after filming an officer shining a flashlight at reporters outside the H&M store on Great George Street. Speaking to the press after being released at around 9pm, the two journalists said they told the police they were reporters. The officers then took down their personal details and press credentials before letting them go. Hong Kong used to be the only place on Chinese soil – besides Macau – where commemoration of the crackdown could be held in public. Tens of thousands of residents gathered annually in Victoria Park in Causeway Bay for candlelight vigils on June 4 every year to mourn the victims. But authorities banned the Tiananmen vigil gathering at Victoria Park for the first time in 2020, citing Covid-19 restrictions, and imposed the ban again in 2021, nearly a year after a national security law imposed by Beijing came into effect. The vigil organiser – Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China – voted a year later to disband after its former leaders Lee Cheuk-yan, Albert Ho, and Chow Hang-tung were charged with incitement to subversion under the national security law. Chow, who is currently detained pending trial, announced on Sunday that she would launch a 36-hour hunger strike in prison on Wednesday to mark 36 years since the crackdown took place. 'I believe we all will have our own ways to remember the day,' read the post shared by Chow's Patreon account, which is managed by the activist's family and friends. The police set up anti-crash barriers outside the Sogo department store after a blue private vehicle drove onto the pedestrian road. The driver was taken away by the police, and the car was towed. Local media outlet The Collective reported on Wednesday that some police officers were dropped off from a Government Flying Services helicopter at Lion Rock, where banners and signs commemorating the Tiananmen crackdown appeared in previous years. The officers set up camp near the mountaintop, the report read. In an email reply to HKFP's enquiries, the police force said: 'Police will not disclose specific operational details as it may affect the effectiveness of Police's operations.' AsOne Store, a pro-democracy business run by former district councillor Derek Chu in Mong Kok, is distributing commemorative digital candles for free on Wednesday to mark the anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown. Some candles are wrapped with labels that read 'Tiananmen Mothers,' referring to a group of parents who say their children died during the 1989 crackdown and have since advocated for Beijing to stop treating discussions of the event as taboo. Chu told HKFP on Wednesday afternoon that more than 20 people had gone to the store to get the candles. AsOne also sells candles from another pro-democracy store, Heung Together, which was inspected by Hong Kong customs officers on Tuesday, the eve of the Tiananmen anniversary. 'It is really depressing every day in Hong Kong when you dare not speak up. But on June 4, I see that there are still many people who stand firm in their beliefs. I can still feel the spirit of those who want to safeguard the truth,' Chu said. It is the third consecutive year that the store has displayed candles to commemorate the historic event, after the annual candlelight vigils in Victoria Park were snuffed out. The Tiananmen crackdown occurred on June 4, 1989, ending months of student-led demonstrations in China. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People's Liberation Army cracked down on protesters in Beijing.
Asia Times
3 days ago
- Asia Times
Anwar's immunity bid fails in rule-of-law test for Malaysia
In a landmark June 4 ruling, Malaysia's High Court denied Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's controversial attempt to shield himself from civil proceedings by invoking a constitutional mechanism — a move critics say was a veiled attempt at political immunity. The court's rejection of Anwar's bid marks the beginning of a legal confrontation unprecedented in Malaysian history: a sitting prime minister now stands to defend himself in court while governing the nation. The decision arrives on the heels of a motion by Anwar's legal team seeking to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court. These questions, according to the defense, pertained to the burdens placed on the Prime Minister's Office by an ongoing civil suit and were framed not as an immunity plea but as a request for a 'constitutional filter.' Yet the distinction was semantic at best. 'We are not claiming immunity,' Anwar's counsel asserted on June 3. 'We are simply seeking clarity to protect the executive's function.' But the subtext was clear: Anwar wanted out of the dock. The case in question — a civil suit filed by Muhammed Yusoff Rawther alleging sexual misconduct by Anwar — predates Anwar's premiership. The incident allegedly occurred in 2018, and Rawther filed the suit in 2020. Notably, Anwar did not attempt to strike out the suit at any point over the past three years. Only on May 23, 2025 — a staggering 912 days after he assumed office — did he pivot to constitutional arguments. Rawther's lawyer, Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, minced no words in court. 'Why did the Prime Minister take 912 days to raise this issue?' he asked. 'If the matter truly affected his ability to discharge executive functions, he should have addressed it long ago.' Rafique also pointed out that Anwar's affidavit failed to provide any reason for the delay — a procedural omission that, in the eyes of many, exposed the real motivation behind the application. More damningly, Rafique invoked Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. 'No man — not even the Prime Minister — can stand above that,' he said. 'Immunity, whether cloaked as a filter or wrapped in legalese, is still immunity.' Presiding Judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed all eight questions as 'untenable, abstract and speculative.' She ruled that the Federal Court need not be burdened with academic hypotheticals. The trial, she affirmed, will proceed as scheduled on June 16, and 20,000 ringgit (US$4,700) in legal costs were awarded to Rawther. Anwar's team immediately sought an urgent stay of the ruling, but it also was dismissed. They now have 30 days to file an appeal to the Court of Appeal, though the countdown to the trial has already begun. In her oral judgment, Roz Mawar made it clear: Articles 39, 40, and 43 of the Constitution — which Anwar's team cited to support their plea — contain no implicit or explicit provision for immunity. The Constitution, she emphasized, enshrines accountability, not executive insulation. Anwar's maneuver has drawn comparisons to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 2020 attempt to sidestep legal scrutiny. Facing multiple indictments, Netanyahu petitioned the Knesset for parliamentary immunity, claiming the charges were politically motivated. While Israel's system at least provides a legal pathway for such immunity via legislative vote, Malaysia's does not. Anwar's attempt to manufacture a similar buffer through the courts was both bold and, ultimately, unsuccessful. In both cases, the public response was the same: dismay at the spectacle of a sitting prime minister attempting to rewrite the rules mid-game. Anwar's critics say his move reeks of the same hubris — a desperate attempt to evade moral reckoning while cloaked in constitutional garb. For a man who once stood as the face of Reformasi, the optics are devastating. Here is Anwar — long celebrated as a martyr of political injustice, imprisoned under Mahathir Mohamad's authoritarian regime — now attempting to insulate himself from due process using the very levers of power he once opposed. This isn't Anwar's first brush with accusations of overreach. His 1999 conviction for abuse of power — widely seen as politically charged — is now being unearthed in conversations across social media and political circles alike. History, as they say, echoes. The parallel doesn't stop there. Like Thailand's Thaksin Shinawatra — another leader accused of self-enrichment and later pardoned — Anwar has blurred the lines between public service and political dynasty. His appointment of Thaksin as ASEAN adviser and his own daughter Nurul Izzah as Deputy President of the PKR have raised questions about nepotism and political insulation, further damaging his image as a reformer. Conversely, Rawther's credibility has only been strengthened by this legal victory. He has, for years, insisted that his pursuit of justice is not politically motivated. The June 4 ruling — which affirms the legitimacy of his claim and the court's commitment to due process — lends weight to that assertion. In a political landscape often defined by backroom deals and unaccountable elites, Rawther has emerged as a symbol of perseverance — a private citizen holding the nation's most powerful man to legal scrutiny. This verdict could well reshape how Malaysia is seen on the regional stage. As the country currently chairing ASEAN, the world is watching. The failure of Anwar's immunity gambit is a litmus test of Malaysia's democratic maturity. What signal would it have sent if a sitting Prime Minister could so easily erect a legal wall around himself? The judiciary, by rejecting this narrative, has reaffirmed Malaysia's commitment to constitutional supremacy and rule of law. In Rafique's words outside the court, 'This ruling ensures that in Malaysia, no executive, no prime Minister, no monarch can place himself above the people.' This episode will linger in the nation's political memory — not just for what it reveals about Anwar's instincts, but for what it says about the resilience of Malaysia's institutions. The prime minister now finds himself in uncharted territory: governing while on trial, a dual burden with no modern precedent in Malaysia. Anwar once said, 'Justice is the soul of governance.' It remains to be seen whether he will honor that creed — or be judged by it.
Asia Times
3 days ago
- Asia Times
Now the hard part: Lee Jae-myung and S Korea's quest for balance
This article was originally published by Pacific Forum. It is republished with permission. When Lee Jae-myung last ran for the South Korean presidency in 2022 he campaigned for balance in Seoul's foreign relations. At a time when the Biden administration pushed for not just closer bilateral but trilateral cooperation with Japan on the security issues of the day and Lee found himself in a tight contest with a conservative candidate happy to accede to Biden's wishes, this meant stressing an open hand to China and a willingness to say no to the United States. Three years later, Korea has just finished a snap election following an aborted martial law declaration and impeachment process. Lee, in his now-successful campaign to win the presidency again, stressed balance. However, the circumstances around him and around the Korean Peninsula have shifted starkly – as has the meaning of 'balance.' Instead of a Biden administration eager to deepen cooperation with Seoul at all levels, Lee will have a counterpart in Washington who demands to see results in keeping with the US administration's goals. And while the US administration clearly does have its eyes on the Indo-Pacific and seeks to contain China's ambitions there, US-Korea ties have not flourished during Seoul's leadership vacuum over the past several months. Supporters of the alliance have been holding their breath to see how Korea's next president will gel with President Donald Trump on a personal level. Most recently, rumors of a US troop drawdown have set off fears of a decreased US commitment to South Korea, especially regarding the deterrence of North Korea. It is in light of these developments that some of Lee's recent remarks, including his praise of Trump's dealmaking skill and of the role of US Forces Korea in ensuring regional stability should be read. While such remarks may have surprised those who remember the foreign policy planks of Lee's last campaign for the presidency, they make sense under current conditions: North Korea remains a looming and unpredictable security threat. China – with its ambitions of regional hegemony – hovers over all, and not everyone in Washington is convinced of Seoul's indispensability. Whatever else is true of Lee, he seemingly recognizes that balance will not be achieved if the US role diminishes and China's grows unabated. Furthermore, Lee's previous stances on China, the US, Japan and other foreign policy matters, when coupled with his domestic policy proposals – such as supporting a universal basic income during the 2022 campaign – suggested that he would govern firmly from the left. Once Yoon Suk Yeol was removed over his ill-fated martial law declaration and Lee became the clear favorite, Lee has scaled back previous promises and even tried to rebrand himself as 'centrist-conservative.' All of which is to say that, ultimately, Lee Jae-myung is a less a progressive ideologue than a politician – for both good and ill. Yes, his policy proposals have in the past earned comparisons to Bernie Sanders; they've also earned him the sobriquet of 'Korea's Trump.' And now he has the presidency, a massive majority in the National Assembly and a fragmented opposition. Assuming he establishes a rapport with President Trump, he would enjoy broad room to maneuver over the next five years, including in the security sphere. There are some things to ponder in the meantime. First, will Lee's elevation and the Democratic Party's return to power mean more inter-Korean talks? The odds for such talks are certainly better than they were under Yoon, but not necessarily good. With Kim Jong Un officially swearing off unification with the South and enjoying ties with Russia, North Korea may be in no hurry to cozy up to Washington for sanctions relief. Even if he does, one lesson he appears to have learned from the Moon Jae-in years is that South Korea is irrelevant to his goals: Kim wants sanctions reduction and only the US is necessary for that. If North Korea bypasses South Korea entirely to achieve its diplomatic objectives over the next five years, Seoul may actually have a weaker hand in dealing with Pyongyang and its regional partnerships may become even more important. Second, 'balance' between China and the US may not be up to Lee. Enjoying the security benefits that come with being a US ally and the economic boon of partnering with China would be a difficult posture under any circumstances. It will prove especially challenging if the rumors of US troop withdrawal prove true, leaving Lee to convince the US to increase its engagement in other ways, whether economically, in terms of intelligence-sharing, or in bolstering defense through weapons acquisition. But Beijing presents other problems: China remains deeply unpopular in Korea, and not all governments that have shifted in the direction of the US since the Covid-19 pandemic did so voluntarily. Should Seoul's decisions in the security, trade, or tech spheres displease Beijing, the measures China takes in response may force South Korea down the path of Australia, India and the Philippines, whose domestic discontent with Chinese actions pushed them into Washington's arms. If that happens popular sentiment could force Lee into a more hawkish position than he is comfortable with, and into a confrontation with his own party. No one expects Lee to be as friendly to Japan as his predecessor, who made unprecedented (and unpopular) gestures toward Tokyo in the name of trilateral security cooperation. But just because Lee is not another Yoon Suk Yeol does not mean he has to be another Moon Jae-in, who regularly inveighed against the 'collaborators,' abrogated the 2015 comfort women agreement with Japan to the delight of activists but not defense specialists, and threatened more serious steps like ending South Korea's involvement in the GSOMIA. Even if Lee declines to meet the Japanese prime minister for a summit, stable ties – marked by continued dialogues in the bilateral and trilateral formats – are in Korea's best interests. It's one thing for Lee to request sincere contrition from Japan regarding its imperial past; it's another thing entirely to throw away those ties to the benefit of China's hegemonic present. For a non-movement conservative to bolster bilateral Japan ties, even incrementally, will do wonders for the relationship over the long term. Lee has come under fire for saying that his reaction to a China-Taiwan contingency would be to say ' xie xie ' to both sides and otherwise steer clear. One can certainly decry such indifference. While Lee has sought to frame this as seeking good relations with both Taipei and Beijing, for an autocratic power to attempt the forcible absorption of a liberal democracy would have serious repercussions for all free societies and for US security guarantees, across the Indo-Pacific. Neutrality is not good enough. However, the ambiguity of Korea's response to a Taiwan contingency did not begin with Lee and it is not up to him to solve alone. The United States must play a role in determining the parameters of Seoul's engagement, including by organizing discussions with Seoul at the track 2 level and above to help decide what Seoul's response to a Taiwan Strait emergency would be. A good first step would be for a US-ROK summit to include a statement opposing any effort to change the status quo by force. Given recent Chinese diplomatic initiatives, even that might count as a bold step from Seoul. Again, the key word is 'balance' – and not just in foreign affairs. In addition to the personal differences compared with his predecessor that Lee brings to the presidency, his party's base will have different demands. How he manages those expectations in the face of a rapidly changing security climate will determine his legacy, and maybe South Korea's future. Rob York ( rob@ ) is director for regional affairs at Pacific Forum International. He is the editor of Pacific Forum publications and spearheads Pacific Forum outreach to the Korean Peninsula and South Asia. He earned his PhD in Korean history in December 2023.
