The closing of the Star Ferry Pier on 11 November 2006 and its subsequent dismantling in December, to make room for a highway (known as P2) and a green belt on reclaimed land between Hong Kong station and the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, threw unforeseen shock waves among Hong Kong citizens. The 49-year old construction (just short of the 50 years the government advanced as a criterion for significant her- itage) was not widely seen as architecturally spectacular, but its removal, together with that of the historic clock tower, drew thousands of people for a last visit, and ended in a dra- matic (though small) sit-in, canvas-slashing by activist Ho Loy, a Legislative Council (LegCo) motion requesting that the dismantling be postponed pending further consultation, and petitions signed by thousands of Hong Kong citizens((1). As the Star Ferry Pier appeared beyond saving, after re- moval of the clock tower and the destruction of the building, attention shifted to the adjacent Queen's Pier, also slated for destruction, perhaps architecturally even more understated, and less related to memories of everyday life, as it was mainly used by visiting dignitaries or the arrival of the gov- ernor. Queen's Pier was closed on 26 April 2007, when pro- testers again staged a sit-in and petition signing. This event received the publicised visit of movie star Chow Yun-Fat. The government responded by proposing to dismantle and reconstruct the pier at a nearby location((2), while the Antiq- uities Advisory Board voted to grant it Grade I historic building status, stopping just short of recommending monu- ment status, which would ensure protection against its de- struction (the final decision rests with the Home Secretary). Just as Donald Tsang had argued in January that too much heritage conservation could harm Hong Kong's competitive- ness, Liberal Party chairman James Tien at this point as- serted, Foreign visitors would rather go shopping than see a queen's pavilion, which will not be at the waterfront((3). The rise in cultural heritage demands in fact reveals a new preoccupation with local history and geography. Rather than the ferry terminal itself, it is Victoria Harbour, progressively dwindling due to land reclamation on both sides, which is presumably at the heart of public concern. Commuter-style crossing of the harbour by ferry for a token fare, arguably a defining feature of Hong Kong lifestyle shared by many, will dwindle with the inconvenient new location of the Pier (the footbridge leading to it was nowhere near comple- tion when the old Pier was closed), also criticized as fake old, on the grounds of its design modelled on the original Edwardian Star Ferry Pier rather than its gritty 1950s suc- cessor (the Star Ferry began operating in 1888). The pres- ent controversy is in fact only part of the ongoing discussion over the past two years of government plans for redevelop- ment of the waterfront (the Reclamation Urban Design Study), recently focused on the HK$5.2 bil- lion construction of a new government complex at the Tamar site in Admiralty((4). Civic Exchange, for one, has questioned the need for such a hugely expanded government building in a prime location, and argued for a Central Park in the lo- cation instead((5). The underlying assumption in this debate is of course, as more generally in Hong Kong politics, that the government, as well as certain members of LegCo, tend to favour business interests, especially real estate and rede- velopment, to which several important tycoons are closely linked, over public opinion and democratic consultation.Although not comparable in scope to other grassroots move- ments in recent years, the cultural heritage controversy thus reveals many of the concerns central to the continued vital- ity of civil society in post-handover Hong Kong. It involves a wide range of NGOs, from the most local to the most in- ternational, with 17 such groups jointly presenting the peti- tion to save Queen's Pier((6). …