Hong Kong was once a vision of China’s urban future. Now, not so much

Commemorating the 20th anniversary of the handover. Image: Getty.

Once a vision for urban development, Hong Kong has seen unprecedented changes to cityscape following its transfer of sovereignty to China 20 years ago. Its transformation into a global financial hub promised a vital link between East and West– but that vision that now seems to be fading fast.

Since its handover in 1997, Hong Kong has been paralysed by its inability to resolve disputes on important development projects. Each year the region must roll out HK$70bn worth of public development projects, subject to approval by the Legislative Council of Hong Kong. Yet, frequent filibustering from political rivals has resulted in only HK$4.8bn projects being approved this year.

Adding to this problem, widespread distrust of its Beijing-backed leadership often leads to vicious political disputes between the central government and the pro-democracy opposition.  

"Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability are largely because of the motherland", says Wang Zhenmin, the legal head of the China Liaison Office. Although the region relies heavily on mainland support, it has also exacerbated many existing problems.

Before the handover, Hong Kong had a reputation for the speed and efficiency with which it developed new buildings and structures. Now, however, its climbing skyscrapers seem to have come to grinding halt – a factor that can be broadly attributed to a lack of developable land.

Its popularity among mainland Chinese has resulted in almost a million migrating to the territory. That’s contributed to Hong Kong’s skyrocketing housing prices, which have risen by almost 400 per cent since its real estate flop 14 years ago.

It is for this reason that the housing policy think tank, Demographia, identifies Hong Kong as the least affordable place to live in the world. Recently, a parking space in the Western District sold for HK$5.8m (£576,000).

With its soaring rent prices, Hong Kong suffers from massive income inequality, too. The authorities have taken some steps to tackle this: last March, the minimum wage was raised to HK$34.50 an hour. But some argue that this still fails to meet rising living costs.

In many ways, Hong Kong has benefitted economically from an influx of mainland Chinese workforce. However, this has also been accompanied by a growing awareness of the importance of Mandarin, or Putonghua. Large international corporations tend to seek out Putonghua-speaking employees, leaving the local population ill-equipped to thrive in the new business environment.

Many also argue that there is a government bias towards Putonghua in schools. In 2009, a controversial decision from the Standing Committee in Language Education and Research led to a pledge to invest HK$26 million for schools to switch teaching from Cantonese to Putonghua.

Elsewhere, this demographic shift is marked by an outflux of local Hong Kong residents. The number of local residents permanently moving to Taiwan increased by over 36 per cent last year, while a recent survey showed that 42 per cent of residents wanted to leave Hong Kong.

Another pressing issue is congestion: nearly 40,000 journeys are made between the mainland and the island every day. The construction of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge will increase capacity to almost 220,000. But the project has since suffered a two year delay due to overspending.

In line with environmental concerns over traffic, the problem of plastic waste disposal in Hong Kong is also a growing epidemic. The region produces nearly 2,000 tonnes of it a day – constituting over 80 per cent of its drifting sea refuse. On top of this, its inability to process the material leads to frequent delays in infrastructure projects by environmentalist groups. However, stricter air quality targets have certainly led to a decrease in air pollution, along with a shift in people’s attitude towards sustainability.

So what does the future hold for Hong Kong? Its tense political climate shows no sign of abating. The tightening grip of Beijing is perhaps best marked by Chinese President Xi Jinping’s speech at the anniversary ceremony last week: “Any attempt… to use Hong Kong to carry out infiltration and sabotage against the mainland is an act that crosses the red line” – a thinly veiled reference to the 2014 pro-democracy Umbrella Movement.

For the time being, the region continues to benefit from world-class road and rail infrastructure. Its skyline still glitters with the lights of buildings rising above the clouds. One thing is clear, however – Hong Kong is no longer the promising cityscape once dreamed of by its inhabitants.


Barnet council has decided a name for its new mainline station. Exciting!

Artist's impression of the new Brent Cross. Image: Hammerson.

I’ve ranted before about the horror of naming stations after the lines that they’re served by (screw you, City Thameslink). So, keeping things in perspective as ever, I’ve been quietly dreading the opening of the proposed new station in north London which has been going by the name of Brent Cross Thameslink.

I’ve been cheered, then, by the news that station wouldn’t be called that at all, but will instead go by the much better name Brent Cross West. It’s hardly the cancellation of Brexit, I’ll grant, but in 2017 I’ll take my relief wherever I can find it.

Some background on this. When the Brent Cross shopping centre opened besides the A406 North Circular Road in 1976, it was only the third large shopping mall to arrive in Britain, and the first in London. (The Elephant & Castle one was earlier, but smaller.) Four decades later, though, it’s decidedly titchy compared to newer, shinier malls such as those thrown up by Westfield – so for some years now, its owners, Hammerson, have wanted to extend the place.

That, through the vagaries of the planning process, got folded into a much bigger regeneration scheme, known as Brent Cross Cricklewood (because, basically, it extends that far). A new bigger shopping centre will be connected, via a green bridge over the A406, to another site to the south. There you’ll find a whole new town centre, 200 more shops, four parks, 4m square feet of offices space and 7,500 homes.

This is all obviously tremendously exciting, if you’re into shops and homes and offices and not into depressing, car-based industrial wastelands, which is what the area largely consists of at the moment.

The Brent Cross site. Image: Google.

One element of the new development is the new station, which’ll sit between Hendon and Cricklewood on the Thameslink route. New stations are almost as exciting as new shops/homes/offices, so on balance I'm pro.

What I’ve not been pro is the name. For a long time, the proposed station has been colloquially referred to as Brent Cross Thameslink, which annoys me for two reasons:

1) Route names make rubbish modifiers because what if the route name changes? And:

2) It’s confusing, because it’s nearly a mile from Brent Cross tube station. West Hampstead Thameslink (euch), by contrast, is right next to West Hampstead tube.

Various other names have been proposed for the station. In one newsletter, it was Brent Cross Parkway; on Wikipedia, it’s currently Brent Cross South, apparently through confusion about the name of the new town centre development.

This week, though, Barnet council quietly confirmed it’d be Brent Cross West:

Whilst the marketing and branding of BXS needs to be developed further, all parties agree that the station name should build upon the Brent Cross identity already established. Given the station is located to the west of Brent Cross, it is considered that the station should be named Brent Cross West. Network Rail have confirmed that this name is acceptable for operational purposes. Consequently, the Committee is asked to approve that the new station be named Brent Cross West.

Where the new station will appear on the map, marked by a silly red arrow. Image: TfL.

That will introduce another irritating anomaly to the map, giving the impression that the existing Brent Cross station is somehow more central than the new one, when in fact they’re either side of the development. And so:

Consideration has also been given as to whether to pursue a name change for the tube station from “Brent Cross” to “Brent Cross East”.

Which would sort of make sense, wouldn’t it? But alas:

However owing to the very high cost of changing maps and signage London-wide this is not currently being pursued.

This is probably for the best. Only a handful of tube stations have been renamed since 1950: the last was Shepherd’s Bush Market, which was until 2008 was simply Shepherd's Bush, despite being quite a long way from the Shepherd's Bush station on the Central line. That, to me, suggests that one of the two Bethnal Green stations might be a more plausible candidate for an early rename.

At any rate: it seems unlikely that TfL will be renaming its Brent Cross station to encourage more people to use the new national rail one any time soon. But at least it won’t be Brent Cross Thameslink.

Jonn Elledge is the editor of CityMetric. He is on Twitter as @jonnelledge and also has a Facebook page now for some reason. 

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook