Guangdong vehicles to be allowed into Hong Kong urban areas ‘in phases' as gov't vows to strengthen safeguards
The government aims to roll out the 'Southbound Travel for Guangdong Vehicles' scheme by the end of this year, Chan said in an interview with state-backed newspaper Wen Wei Po on Monday.
Initially, mainland vehicles will only be allowed to park at the Hong Kong end of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, Chan said. Mainland drivers can then transit to nearby Hong Kong International Airport or use public transport to get to other districts.
The city's government would later allow Guangdong vehicles to drive into the urban areas of Hong Kong 'in phases,' Chan said, without disclosing a timeline or the definition of 'urban areas.'
She said authorities on both sides were considering the quota for vehicles, the border crossing arrangements, and support facilities.
Authorities will strengthen risk management, requesting Guangdong drivers to comply with Hong Kong laws, ensure the safety of their vehicles, and buy relevant insurance cover.
Mainland China drives on the right while the former British colony of Hong Kong drives on the left.
Chan headed to Guangdong on Monday for further talks on the scheme.
A scheme prolonged
Hong Kong introduced the Northbound Travel for Hong Kong Vehicles on July 1, 2023, with local cars allowed to cross the border and drive into Guangdong province.
Four months later, the then-transport and logistics chief Lam Sai-hung announced that the government would introduce the southbound scheme by 2024.
Lam said at that time that Guangdong drivers would only be allowed to park at Hong Kong Port at the end of the bridge. Since Hong Kong was relatively small and crowded, authorities had not yet set a schedule for Guangdong vehicles to enter urban areas.
In May, former Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying in a Facebook post questioned why authorities were delaying the scheme.
'To do something, you only need one reason; not to do something, you will have a hundred reasons. The scheme of Guangdong vehicles for southbound travel has been prolonged due to a hundred reasons,' Leung wrote in Cantonese.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
a day ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong's MTR adopts AI-powered systems for deploying trains, crowd control
Hong Kong's rail giant has implemented two AI-powered systems to help formulate train deployment and crowd control plans for major events at Kai Tak Sports Park, with plans to consider expanding their applications. The MTR Corporation said on Friday that the two artificial intelligence (AI) tools – a ridership prediction model and intelligent crowd diversion system – had helped disperse passengers efficiently from major events at the park. The ridership prediction model, developed by the firm and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, relies on billions of data sets collected from government surveys and MTR operations to predict passenger distribution across the entire rail network. It also analysed the rail firm's historical passenger data spanning more than 100 days when concerts and sports events had taken place at Hong Kong Stadium and the Hong Kong Coliseum to generate virtual scenarios after such events. 'We can therefore predict the number of passengers, their travel directions, and the stations and lines they use after an event ends,' said Chan Hing-keung, the MTR Corp's chief of operations for engineering service and innovations. 'With the prediction, we can cross-check with the analysis by the operations team, and determine whether the frequency of trains could disperse the crowds.' Launched in July 2024, the model was first used at the end of that month, when four stations on the Kwun Tong line were temporarily closed as the rail operator upgraded its facilities.
HKFP
a day ago
- HKFP
UK to ‘never allow' political extradition of Hongkongers after alarm over law changes
The UK security minister has said the country would 'never' allow Hongkongers to be extradited for political reasons, after activists raised alarm that changes to an extradition act could put them at risk. Dan Jarvis, the UK's security chief, said on Wednesday that there had been 'inaccurate' reporting on modifications being made to the country's extradition laws. Last month, he said the UK was planning to remove Hong Kong from the UK's Extradition Act 2003, as it no longer had a formal extradition arrangement with the city after the UK scrapped the treaty in response to Beijing imposing a national security law in Hong Kong in 2020. In place of that, the UK would cooperate with Hong Kong on 'the case-by-case ad hoc basis available for non-treaty partners,' Jarvis added. In response, UK-based advocacy group Hong Kong Watch said the proposal could give rise to 'opaque extradition cooperation outside the protections of a formal treaty-based system.' Conservative Party lawmaker Alicia Kearns wrote a letter to Jarvis expressing concern about the 'transnational repression' faced by Hong Kong democracy activists and questioning how the UK could protect them from Hong Kong authorities. In response, Jarvis said on Wednesday that the change – removing Hong Kong from the UK's Extradition Act 2003 – simply 'formalises the severing of ties between the British and Hong Kong extradition systems.' 'The government will never allow a situation where [Hongkongers] or any other nationality is extradited for politically motivated purposes, he said, adding that UK courts have 'extensive powers' and could bar extradition if it is determined that a request is political. Arrest warrants Since Beijing imposed a national security law in Hong Kong following the 2019 protests and unrest, scores of activists have relocated to other countries – with the UK being one of the most popular destinations. Hong Kong police have issued arrest warrants and bounties of up to HK$1 million for 19 overseas activists accused of breaching the national security law. Some of them are now based in the UK, including activists Nathan Law, Finn Lau, and Chloe Cheung. Last week, police issued a new round of warrants for 15 activists, plus a HK$200,000 bounty each for information that could lead to their arrests. Police cited their involvement in a political group deemed subversive by Hong Kong authorities. Jarvis said the UK government 'stands resolutely' with Hongkongers who have relocated to the UK, and that he was 'deeply concerned by the news of further bounties having been issued.' 'Any attempt by any foreign state to intimidate, harass or harm individuals in the UK will not be tolerated,' he said. In June 2020, Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong's mini-constitution – bypassing the local legislature – following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts, which were broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers, alarming democrats, civil society groups and trade partners, as such laws have been used broadly to silence and punish dissidents in China. However, the authorities say it has restored stability and peace to the city.
AllAfrica
a day ago
- AllAfrica
Trump's new trade order is here. Will it work?
The beginning of August marks the latest deadline for US President Donald Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff policy. This era of chaos and uncertainty began on April 2, and the situation remains fluid. With the deadline for partners to secure a deal with Washington now passed, it's a good time to take a broader view and consider if Trump's trade gamble is paying off. The objectives of the tariff policy include raising tax revenues, delivering lower prices for American consumers, and boosting American industry while creating manufacturing jobs. The president has also vowed to get better trade deals for the US to reduce its trade deficit and to face down China's growing influence on the world stage. But recently the US Federal Reserve voted to keep interest rates unchanged at 4.25% to 4.5%, despite pressure from Trump to lower them. In his monthly press briefing, Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, said they were still in the early stages of understanding how the tariff policy would affect inflation, jobs and economic growth. On tariffs, Powell did say that revenues had increased substantially to US$30 billion a month. However, only a small portion of the tariffs are being absorbed by overseas exporters, with most of the cost being borne by US import companies. In comments that will concern the Trump administration, the Fed said the cost of the tariffs was beginning to show up in consumer prices. The Fed expects inflation to increase to 3% by the end of the year, above its 2% target. US unemployment remains low, with Powell saying the economy is at or very close to full employment. While Powell's decision to hold interest rates probably irritated Trump, economic theory suggests that lowering them with the US economic cycle at full employment would be likely to increase inflation and the cost of living for US consumers. A survey by Bloomberg economists suggests that US GDP growth forecasts are lower since April 2025, specifically because of its tariff policy. In terms of boosting US employment, the US administration can point to significant wins in the pharmaceutical sector. In July, British-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca announced plans to spend $50 billion expanding its US research and manufacturing facilities by 2030. The announcement follows a similar pledge from Swiss pharmaceuticals firm Roche in April to invest $50 billion in the US over the next five years. The impact of tariffs on traditional US manufacturing industries is less positive. The Ford Motor Company has warned that its profits will see a sharp drop. This is largely down to a net tariff impact that the firm says will cost it $2 billion this financial year. This is despite the company making nearly all of its vehicles in the US. Firms such as Ford are seeing an increase in tariff-related costs for imports. This dents their profits as well as dividends to shareholders. In recent weeks and months, the US has announced major new trade agreements, including with the UK, Japan, South Korea and the EU. Talks on a trade deal with China continue. But rather than trade deals, these announcements should be thought of as frameworks for trade deals. No legally binding documents have been signed to date. It will take many months before a clear picture emerges of how these bilateral deals will affect the US trade deficit overall. Meanwhile, in Washington, a federal appeals court will hear a case from two companies that are suing Trump over the use of his International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. VOS Selections Inc, a wine and spirits importer, and Plastic Services and Products, a pipe and fittings company, are arguing that the president has 'no authority to issue across-the-board worldwide tariffs without congressional approval.' With so much in play, it is difficult to judge whether Trump's tariff policy can be viewed as a success. Higher tariff revenues from imports, as well as significant investments from the pharmaceutical industry, can be seen as clear wins. But increasing consumer costs through rising inflation, as well as tariff costs hurting US manufacturers, are clear negatives. While several framework trade deals have been announced, the real devil will, of course, be in the details. Perhaps the greatest impact of the tariff policy has been the uncertainty of this new approach to trade and diplomacy. The Trump administration views trade as a zero-sum game. If one side is winning, the other side must be losing. This view of international trade harks back to mercantilism, an economic system that predates capitalism. Adam Smith and David Riccardo, the founders of capitalist theory, advocated for free trade. They argued that if countries focused on what they were good at making, then both sides could benefit – a so-called positive-sum game. This approach has dominated global trade since the post-war period. Since then, the US has become the largest and wealthiest economy in the world. By creating the institutions of global trade (the IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organization), the US has advanced its interests – and American-based multinationals dominate, especially in areas such as technology. But China and others now threaten this US domination, and Trump is tearing up the economic rulebook. But economic theory clearly positions tariffs as the wrong policy path for the US to assert and further its economic interests in the medium to long term. That's why Trump's course of action remains such a gamble. Conor O'Kane is senior lecturer in economics, Bournemouth University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
