tim's experiment

There is a whole book (Cannibalism and  the Common Law, by Brian Simpson – a good read) about a 19th century court case, known as the Queen versus Dudley and Stephens, which is a landmark in the British Common Law on murder. The two defendants were among the four survivors from a yacht which sank. After 20 days in an open boat the two defendants decided to kill and eat the cabin boy. The third man, who had dissented from the plan though he shared in the gruesome food supply, appeared as a witness for the prosecution. The defendants’ plea of necessity failed. An interesting part of the book is Mr Simpson’s survey of maritime history, which reveals a widespread belief – occasionally acted on in emergencies – that the “Tradition of the Sea” permitted starving sailors to choose one of their company by lot, and eat him. One of the curious features of these cases is that the supposedly random choice of food fell with suspicious regularity either on the cabin boy or on some sailor who was an outsider, being from a different nationality than his shipmates or otherwise an odd man out. I do not doubt that a similar bias will appear in the definitive work, when it emerges, on the corresponding Russian habit, when in a sledge pursued by wolves, of throwing one occupant out that the rest may escape. It seems there is a deep-seated human instinct at work here.

These lugubrious thoughts are prompted by the continuing saga of the Great Late White Elephant, otherwise known as our high-speed rail connection to Guangzhou — or to Shenzhen, which the mainland system has already reached. Now clearly there are a variety of people who could be held responsible for this, some of whom have already in effect resigned. Realistically, though, there is nothing to blame anyone for. Large rail projects, especially those involving long tunnels, commonly go over time and over budget. The problem with building a tunnel is that until you dig you don’t really know what you will find. One can of course dig bore holes to sample the underground scenery but they only give you a sample. Surprises are still to be expected. A good cure for the whole problem would have been to settle for a less ambitious surface line ending somewhere in the New Territories. But it is too late for that.  No doubt something in the nature of a head on a plate will be demanded eventually, and the question which then arises is whose head it should be.

And I’m afraid tradition suggests that we shall shortly be looking at a severed souvenir of Mr Jay Walder, not because he is the CEO of the MTR Corporation, but because he is, apparently, American. This conforms to the first instinct of a Hong Kong administration in trouble, which is to find a foreigner who can be blamed for the whole thing. It happened with the airport opening. It happened with Harbourfest. It happened with the cable car. Less public examples are also numerous.

Let me suggest one other person who might usefully also be sacrificed. It seems that the MTR board was filled by the Home Affairs Bureau computer which churns out occupants for government appointed seats of all kinds, without much regard for any quality except loyalty. Among the resulting crop of usual suspects are two legislators, Abraham Razack and Ng Leung-sin. Like the rest of the board, these gentlemen were clearly hopeless at their fundamental task of keeping track, in broad terms, of what was going on. Lack of knowledge of railways is a tactful explanation. Mr Ng nominated himself for the chop by having the brass face to tell the South China Morning Post that “big changes could undermine staff morale and disrupt railway projects”.  Any more than they have already been undermined and disrupted by the board’s total incompetence?