Listening to ex-Hong Kong CE Tung Chee-hwa talk about how sad he was to hear about a family having to pay HK$3 million for a 170-square feet flat and his think tank’s idea of chopping down trees to provide enough land to build housing for everyone, a tree may groan.
“Sigh, I clean the polluted air and provide a home for different species of animals that keep the environment healthy. My roots hold the soil together so it doesn’t slide away when there’s heavy rail, and I help filter the rain so what goes into the reservoirs is fairly clean. And yet, all Hong Kong people can think of is cut me down.”
The tree may have added that, right next to the country park where it stands, a sprawling village has just sprawled further with new three-storey village houses built to be sold to outsiders for a profit, or former farmland deliberately ruined as the owner awaits the knock of a developer. The tree may have one or two NGOs with no official position and zero financial clout arguing on its behalf, but they’re hardly a match for the wealth and power of village chiefs, which have successfully put a stop to all conversation about the unsustainable small house policy. So while there’s endless talk of a shortage of land to meet Hong Kong’s housing needs, no one dare suggest the land’s right there, occupied by three-storey high village houses rather than the 50-storey high housing estates that could accommodate thousands more people.
There are villages where the occupants genuinely care about maintaining their rural way of life, but those who have clamoured against any encroachment on their turf are doing so purely for profit. So while their chiefs rub shoulders with the high and mighty, the poor trees can only sigh and hope for the best. After all, the way things are going, climate change may claim them if the chairsaw doesn’t, right?