Paper editorializes against Beijing traffic rules

Beijing's trade mark
via WikipediaThe decision by the Beijing Municipality to resume the restrictions for cars in the city - one of many measures that cleared up the city's sky during the Olympics - has triggered off heated debates about the pros and cons. The measure means that only half of the Beijing cars will be allowed on the street.
The debate has not broad the two sides together, concludes the Economic Observer, who also joins the discussion. In its editorial, after weighting both sides, it concludes that the car restrictions in Beijing are not legal.

The new ruling seems well-grounded, yet we believe such power by local authorities is only meant for special and emergency situations, and questions must be asked whether or not the local government has sidestepped the legislation process in issuing the new ruling.

What's more, private cars are personal assets. In accordance with the Property Law, owners have the rights of possession, use, earning and disposal of their private assets. By limiting the usage of private cars, has the Beijing municipal authority infringed private property rights?

I think what the editors have missed here is that Beijing is facing an environmental emergency, although it is a daily emergency. That would allow local authorities to both limit car traffic and infringe on people's private property rights. Of course, having a solid discussion is very useful, but I would join the arguments of the Beijing Municipality here.

Commercial
The environment is one of the key issues China's has to face. At the China Speakers Bureau we are happy to have Charles McElwee on our speakers list as an eminent specialist on the environtment. When you are interested in having one of them as a speaker, do let us know.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Beijing reintroduces car rules
• Beijing Cleans Up for the Olympics