What most university students are concerned about is no longer which subjects they are interested in or who the best lecturers are. Instead, they are eager to find the best, well-paid and easy part-time jobs. University students do part-time jobs for a number of reasons. Some want to lighten the family financial burden. For this kind of student, I sympathize with their heavy workloads.

Besides, some students would like to obtain valuable experiences through working with different people in an environment outside of school.

However, as far as I know, most students do not do part-time jobs for the above two reasons. The main concern for them, instead, is to increase income for their own spending.

Actually, I am not trying to say that students taking part-time jobs are not good. Firstly, taking a part-time job is absolutely no problem for a mature university student. Besides the income, I think one should also consider the time available and the ability to cope with such a heavy workload.

In most cases, students tend to ignore the costs in taking part-time jobs — for example, the time needed for studying. Then, three years may be wasted. By thinking thoroughly and carefully, one can get valuable experience in part-time jobs.

After all, the importance of tertiary education is to let young people have more freedom to make their own decisions and equip themselves with knowledge and skills to face challenges in the future. The most important thing is to choose what is most suitable for oneself and be devoted to it.

The world is outraged that the Chinese government jailed the leading dissident, Mr. Wei Jing Sheng, for 14 years under such a closed-door trial, open only to a selected audience. In 1979, Mr. Wei was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for treason, counter-revolutionary activities and subverting the government.

Now, totally he will be spending nearly 30 years in jail for his differing views from the government’s.

Mr. Wei’s effort in fighting for democracy began in 1978 in the Democratic Wall Movement. He expressed his views about the future development of China and urged the government to establish democratic rule as soon as possible. He even openly criticized Mr. Deng Xiao-ping for his tyranny. However, Mr. Wei’s speech and activities might be too radical for the Chinese government, which was still in an initial stage of democracy. But he had already paid 14 years for that. Why does the government destroy him with another 14 years?

After his release in 1994, he was stripped of his political rights. Then his democratic campaign and promotional activities became more moderate. Do setting up a fund cooperative and an art exhibition justify the charge of subverting the government? Sadly and ironically, the Chinese government used these reasons to jail him again.

The verdict was in fact also an attack over the confidence of the Hong Kong people. Whether the Chinese government can fulfil its commitment of maintaining the freedom of speech after 1997 is in doubt.

Besides, the way the Chinese government handled the case also focused attention on the closed-door trial. The trial can be described as “pseudo open” because only selected audience was admitted to the hearing. People do not know under what criteria the audience are selected. Besides, the court did not provide supporting evidence for the verdict. Does Mr. Wei deserve a 14-year imprisonment? The trial was all in camera. This fuels worries of the Hong Kong people about a fair judiciary system after 1997.

In the past, the dissidents usually failed to appeal successfully. I think foreign intervention may be the only way that Mr. Wei can be saved.

I am a student at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Every time I walk to the canteen for lunch, I can see a lot of promotional counters set out in the open areas. People from different student’s associations and organizations distribute handbills there. If I take whatever they give me, I will receive at least eight little leaflets. However, these beautifully printed materials are usually just thrown into rubbish bins. The amount of paper wasted is too enormous to be ignored.

I appreciate that many different parties try to inform me about their background and activities . But throwing away so much clean paper is not what I have expected. Therefore, refusing the handbills is my only choice. Why don’t those students think of other methods that are more beneficial to the environment?

Moreover, distribution of handbills is a widely used method for commercial advertising. I cannot remember how many times the green groups have criticized this. I don’t understand why the students still use this advertising strategy.

Being the designers of a future world, we have the responsibility not to follow suit the past misdeeds. Let’s stop wasting paper now.

By the way, a paper collection box for recycling has been placed in a dark corner beside the canteen. Do you remember to put the leaflets that you have already read into that collection box? Does it help prevent wasting paper? Maybe, re-collecting and re-distributing handbills are better than recycling.