Page 166 of 498
106 of 498
Page 166 of 498
162
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
market rate. We can only keep quiet and pay, even when additional costs arise over certain problems with the works, which also increase the on-cost. This is unfair to the Urban Council and our citizens blame us for the high cost and slow progress of our projects. We have no choice but to commission projects to the ASD. It is like tasting a bitter fruit; only the taster knows the bitterness. I think that there has always been low transparency for the ASD's construction projects. The general public have no idea why it takes 2 or 3 years to build a market or why a certain project has to be delayed for half a year. The ASD is not a council, it is not accountable to anyone and it does not have to face the public. In fact, a lot of large-scale projects were not really taken up by the ASD. As Miss WONG pointed out, projects were often contracted out. When the ASD, as the monopolized contractor of the Urban Council had to contract works to outside contractors, the additional operation cost was included in the total expenditure to be borne by the Council, and the on-cost was then drawn on a larger base. We feel that we are being seriously exploited in this regard.
Since the ASD can contract out small projects to outside contractors, why can't we have the right to invite open tenders for some of our projects as suggested in the motion? Maybe as a start, we can invite the ASD to be the supervisor of such projects since we do not have suitable staff of our own. In doing so, our costs will be smaller. This way, we will have to pay supervision fees, not on-costs. The larger the project, the larger the on-cost. Remember, this is public money. I call on all of my colleagues to support this motion. I hope we can reform unreasonable matters within the Urban Council during our term of office. This motion hits at the important part we have to perform, that is, how to reform the work of the Council. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STANLEY NG WING-FAI (in Cantonese): The Democratic Party has considered Miss WONG's motion carefully. We can see the background to this in the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement of 1973 and a directional guideline for the maintenance service and works projects of the Urban Council to be entrusted to a relevant government department.
Miss WONG has just now quoted many figures in respect of capital works. I would like to add one more here. I have just read the Five Year Plan of the Recreation Select Committee to be discussed at a meeting scheduled for tomorrow. A sum of $200 million is supposed to be for maintenance work mostly to be taken up by the EMSD. As such, I think there is a need for a complete overhaul of the system. I mean apart from the ASD, the EMSD's relationship with us should also be reviewed. I notice that Miss WONG considers 16% on-cost to be too high. When architect firms bid for work, they may quote a lower price. However, we can also see other points of concern necessitating a complete overhaul.