What Silicon Wok is, and is not

Silicon Wok works on two narrow questions about the hawker trade.

1. How does a willing newcomer take over from a hawker who is retiring?
2. Can a dish be recorded well enough for someone else to cook it again?

The first is a proposed entry-and-succession study. The second is a proposed cookable heritage record. Both are set out in our first step, with a proposed discussion with NEA and NHB. Nothing is agreed or funded.

The wider Plan proposes more, and it does touch on rents: it suggests published rent bands and a ballot, among much else. Those are ideas offered for discussion, not demands. Our work now is the two questions above. I would rather do two small things well than argue about everything.

What we are not

We are not a campaign on rents. We are not asking for rent caps, and we do not campaign on tender rules. The Hawker Library sets out what is published about rents, with its sources, for anyone to use.

We endorse no party's proposals, and no party endorses us. Anyone may cite the Library. A citation is not an endorsement, either way.

We are not a government body or a consultation. Silicon Wok is independent. It is not affiliated with any government agency. Writing to us is not the same as writing to an agency.

We do not speak for hawkers. We ask them. When we report what a hawker told us, it will be with their consent and in their words.

We raise no money. No fundraising is open. Uncle James pays the running costs himself.

What would change our mind

Evidence. If the figures, or the people at the wok, show that we are asking the wrong question, we will change it. We will say so on the progress log.

How to correct us

Write to [email protected]. Tell us what is wrong and where you read it. A person replies within 48 hours. Every fix is recorded in the change logs.