Severo Portela
Running solo has its peculiarities. On one hand, the acting Chief Executive has to find time to campaign as if the electoral committee that casts the necessary votes was not in place; on the other hand, Chui Sai On as a candidate has to put up an extensive and comprehensive political platform as if he has not been CE for these last five years.
As for the campaign, we have to admit that the candidate did not dodge his political duty of standing his chances, facing criticism and controversy. Even though Chui Sai On is not exactly a public persona. And we should not forget that the CE runs for reelection in troubled times: labor unrest growing, social activism boiling, gaming model resetting.
Regarding Chui’s political platform, we have to say clearly that it looks like a patchwork, but it has to look like one. The platform is designed to include every sector of governance, while engaging all social groups. Being designed this way, the platform makes it difficult to infer an overview; we have to add it up piece by piece. We could start now with the notion of urban renewal.
Under the chapter “Building a Livable City” – in the section subtitled “Increasing the Number of Public Housing Units” – Chui Sai On’s political platform has one point amongst others that draws our attention, or rather our sensible and preemptive concern: “Bearing with the notion of Urban Renewal to drive forward the old district revamping projects.”
By itself, and taken without further explanation, the sub-section notion does not seem to threaten anything or anyone; on the contrary, the line even sounds complementary to whatever has been in place before the arrival of this new concept.
Till now, the law that is supposed to address the rehabilitation of Macau’s old quarters in such a way that neither heritage nor social and economic factors would be alienated was a complete failure to the point that it made a discreet exit. We are not about to regret it and cry over a regulatory misstep unwisely approved without clearly defining basic concepts (heritage), defining social concerns (residents living in squalid environments) and economic priorities (land availability, development and demography). Although the Old Quarters bill did not yield the results it should have done, we do care to underline the fact that this unfortunate piece of legislation presumed a concept of public consultation.
But as the saying goes, the devil is in the details. Since Chui’s platform on ‘urban renewal’ does not elaborate on its form and substance, Macau’s Civic Power Agnes Lam spotted an eventual threat coming from a model (UR) she suspects to be a finished import from Hong Kong. In light of this, we have reason to fear for the preservation of the Old Quarters’ profile and character under the concept of Urban Renewal adopted in the mega-metropolis across the Pearl River Delta, even though the concept of Urban Renewal alone cannot bite.
Perhaps, rejecting change and being unreasonably suspicious of a model that focuses on large-scale rehabilitation instead of a building-by-building look is being too conservative, but we have to be aware of the social/political/economic weight of the property sector. Recently, some developers suggested high-
rise construction (50 floors) as the adequate answer to the housing problems, this way taking the traditional low-rise quarters as airspace to build skyscrapers. Not really a people-first approach, despite the fact that the quality of life of residents in old buildings should be of the utmost concern when we are about to redevelop, rehabilitate or revitalize – even more important than keeping traditional features just for the recreation of third parties.
Cold ‘urban renewal’ is indeed a threat to cultural heritage, to the uniqueness of the local atmosphere, and collective memory – identity, if we look for an umbrella concept. Maybe the discarded legislation should have begun with the exact basic definitions!
No Comments