Page 168 of 498
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
for this phenomenon. Are the 16% on-cost paid by us value for money? I think Members have great doubts. The motion suggests two things, first, to commission private contractors for UC projects, and secondly, to review the criteria for charges.
I want to speak on charges first. I agree with most Members who have just spoken that as the Urban Council's representative to supervise projects, the ASD is responsible to monitor that projects are completed smoothly and on time. When we discuss delays of projects, we often ask the question whether there are penalty clauses to bind contractors. Unfortunately, there are no penalty clauses at all imposed upon ASD, as the Urban Council's representative in supervising projects for the delays. If, as pointed out by Mr. Stanley NG Wing-fai just now, the existing charges are based on the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement of 1973, then there is great doubt as to whether the Memorandum is still suitable for the market today or whether the Urban Council has been paying money for value. As they say, work or no work doesn't change the outcome. Whether the standards of work projects are acceptable to us and the public at large is also a big question mark. Members of the ADLP in this Council fully support the review of charges suggested in the motion.
Secondly, the ADLP has reservations about directly commissioning projects to private contractors. As pointed out by Miss Ada Wong, to do so, the Council may have to set up a professional division so as to offer technical support within the USD. It will surely result in further expansion of the Department. I think we need to carry out further studies before we can ascertain how much faster projects will take to complete and how much resources can be saved.
As we see it, the core of the project delay problem is not with private contractors, but whether we can directly contract out to private contractors. Most important of all is the problem of supervision and monitoring. Whether we rely on the ASD to be the department responsible for supervision or we contract out directly to private contractors, we still have to face the problem of supervision. We therefore feel that an important factor for consideration is how to strengthen the Council's ability to supervise work projects.
As pointed out by Mr. Stanley NG, we feel that this problem must be studied further. Members of ADLP hope that the Capital Works Select Committee will study the problems and directions of suggestions raised in this motion in detail. We find that this motion is aimed at negotiating with the ASD, so we support it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. WONG KING-CHEUNG (in Cantonese): Mr. Chairman, I support the spirit of this motion in principle, but I think many of the problems involved cannot be solved today. The valid points made by Messrs. Stanley NG and TAM Kwok-kiu just now aptly reflect the Council's difficulties in facing the
£198
Page 168 of 498
- 108 of 498
164