Sustainable Tourism in Repulse Bay, Hong Kong
What does a Politician Say about Tourism at Repulse Bay: an Interview with Fergus Fung
To get my project more credibility and more information I decided to talk to an important representative of the District Council of the Southern District of Hong Kong, Mr Fergus Fung, who is a Disctrict Council member for the Liberal Party. I knew Mr Fung from the billboards along the street that gave his name and his photograph as well as his email address. So I wrote to Mr Fung requesting an interview. Fergus Fung replied very quickly saying that was happy to meet with me even though he was quite busy. I looked him up in his office in Wan Chai where Mr Fung runs a publishing company. I had sent him my prepared questions, but interview quickly developed into a lively discussion.
Filip Piket (FP): Do you consider tourism important for the economic development of Repulse Bay?
Fergus Fung (FF): Yes. Tourism is important, not just for Repulse Bay but for Hong Kong as a whole. The Hong Kong economy is dependent on tourism spending, but we have to make sure it is sustainable and that it is balanced. We have had huge growth during the past years. The tourist numbers went up from 4 million 15 years ago to 50 million tourists in 2013. This is a massive run-up which mostly comes from Mainland China. People are worried that with such a fast increase our infrastructure cannot cope. It has also become a social problem, with some Hong Kong people having developed negative feelings about the large numbers of Mainland tourists.
Another idea is talking to the Environment Department to introduce electric coaches. Right now the cost of electric coach is about double the cost of a diesel coach. So there is a need for Government subsidy. Already now electric vehicles are not taxed. So we're going in the right direction but companies need more incentives.
But the traffic congestion and the paring problem will remain. We are looking at different ways to manage the flows. For instance, by capping the number of vehicles per hour, or by staggering the flow of vehicles. The latter is a good idea, but the tour companies would have to reschedule their typical excursions, in which tourists are shepherded around town in the morning and move from the Peak to Repulse Bay between 2pm and 4pm on the way to Stanley. Right now we are also looking at increasing the number of drop-off points.
But no solution is perfect, no measure can solve all the problems. Also, decision making is slow, because such decisions involve a lot of interdepartmental coordination: departments for environment, transport, highway, leisure and cultural services department, economic development department.
FP: Are individual tourists also causing problems?
FF: Individual travelers have less impact on traffic because they mostly come by public transport. The Repulse Bay area is well serviced by public transport. There are five or six large bus lines plus several minibus lines. But sometimes the buses are of course stuck in the traffic congestion.
Individual travelers cause other issues, such as littering. The key thing to reduce littering is education. We have already put up more signs, but you cannot put too many, because that would be visual pollution. We have also placed more rubbish bins, including recycling bins. There are many more already today than two years ago. The LCSD [Leisure and Cultural Services Department] cleans the beach every day. After festivals such as the Mid-autumn festival there is extra cleaning
FP: What can be done to reduce road congestion?
FF: We need to alleviate the traffic because we have only one road. So the District Council has talked about sea transportation, about a sea shuttle service. We’re now discussing this with the Government. They’re open to the idea, but they have also said they cannot run it, it has to be private enterprise. We’re also discussing from where a sea shuttle can run. Maybe from the back of Ocean Park. On the Repulse Bay side the existing pier would need to be upgraded.
I am not in favour of a tramway, it is technically impossible or too expensive. The current road is 50 years old, it cannot be widened without causing tremendous traffic congestion for two years.
We're stuck with the current road infrastructure, there is no way of expanding it. We have to work with what we have. That is also true for car parks, we will have to work with what’s available, there is no space to build a big new one. The new mall in Repulse Bay has some car park space.
It is not possible to limit the number of cars dramatically. Some relief can come from carpooling maybe, including of taxis. I support what HKIS [Hong Kong International School] has done, namely make school buses compulsory and forbid that private cars drop off and collect students. Other schools in the Southern District, such as CDNIS and Singapore International School, haven’t done this yet. Such measure can alleviate the traffic.
FP: Are you optimistic you can solve the problems caused by tourism in Repulse Bay?
FF: Yes, but the task is difficult. We need to balance having tourists with maintaining the interests of residents. Unfortunately in Repulse Bay it is getting to a point where tourism is a real burden. We're trying to find solutions but were working within small parameters, because of the specific limitations of the road infrastructure and the very limited space. Repulse Bay is in fact still best off in the Southern District. Deep Water Bay is too small and has virtually no parking, and South Bay is not attractive to the majority of the tourists. But linking Repulse Bay with South Bay with a boardwalk could be a very good idea. Also sea recreation activities like kayaking, I'd like to have more of it to add to the existing facilities. But each new facility will cause more traffic. Each good idea has a negative side. It comes back to my original point: Hong Kong needs tourism, but we need to think of it properly, especially in residential areas like Repulse Bay.
Hong Kong needs tourism, but we need to think of it properly, especially in residential areas like Repulse Bay.
FP: What can you say about the precise situation in Repulse Bay? Do you think tourism is causing big problems?
FF: In 2013, around 5 million tourists visited Repulse Bay. That is 10% of the total number of 50 million tourists. One of the reasons why Repulse Bay is so popular is that a famous Chinese author wrote about it, so many Mainland visitors want to see it. The peak period for visits is between two to four in the afternoon. Repulse Bay roads are very narrow, and with that number of tourists our infrastructure cannot cope. We have statistics showing that there are 200-300 coaches per hour at peak times. That’s massive! While they wait for their passengers, these coaches idle their engines, causing noise and air pollution. Of course, idling engines is not allowed, but there is not enough police to enforce the rules. Anyway, more important than enforcement is education, getting the coach drivers to understand the pollution aspects. Enforcement can follow after that.
More enforcement on beach? More patrolling? Yes. But education is more important.
Middle Island Channel from Repulse Bay to Deepwater Bay
Interviewing Fergus Fung, a District Council member of the Southern District of Hong Kong
Traffic at Repulse Bay Road
No solution is perfect, no measure can solve all the problems.
I support community involvement.... I do it myself once a year. It cleans up the environment and it has an educational value.
I support community involvement in keeping the environment clean. I do it myself once a year. It cleans up the environment and it has an educational value.
More enforcement on beach? More patrolling? Yes. But this has limitations because we don't have enough manpower. Education is more important.
Sea pollution is a different problem, because it is not caused by tourists but by boats. Or it comes from other parts of Hong Kong. It is very hard to clean up. The sea vacuum cleaner is not very efficient.
This is worrying, because we cannot drive away visitors, they do help the Hong Kong economy. They have done so since 2003 when Hong Kong was hit by SARS and nobody was buying anything in Hong Kong. Then the Beijing Government decided to allow Mainland visitors to come and this has helped the Hong Kong economy tremendously. But right now it is true we have to make sure that this growth is sustainable. We also have to think about the social dimension. Everybody has to respect one another, tourists have to respect locals and locals have to have more understanding for the visitors. Only then it can work.