Page 247 of 654
Page 247 of 654
1654
246
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
referring to open competition and b referring to public facilities done through an open and fair system to satisfy the needs of the public.
I won't say much on those points which the two Members spoke before me agree on. I intend to say more about points on which they differ.
In paragraph 4.7 of the Memorandum of 1973 signed between Government and this Council, it stipulates that Government is responsible for capital works of the Urban Council. In other words, there is no alternative choice for projects of the Urban Council. We can perhaps describe that the Council's projects are currently a government monopoly. This Council will have to choose from designs submitted by the ASD. We have very little say. The Democratic Party believes that changes should be made in regard to stages from design to construction. The most important thing is to review and revise the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement so that we can have a greater say on items such as design and consultancy. 16% as on cost should be linked to service quality.
The Central Library is a case in point. At first, the budget was $595 million, but the tender result saw it jump to $790 million. The Department explained that this Council was not informed of the reason for the increase before and after the tender procedures due to insufficient time. Calculated on the scale presently used, 16% of $700 million is indirect on-cost amounting to $100 million.
I am sure that any private architecture firm in Hong Kong offered with $100 million as consultation fee would advise the commissioning authority that there could be a jack up of the budget upon tendering. Therefore, the Democratic Party feels our system should be revamped. We should devise a charging system whereby actual expenditure is linked to service standard, or else, this Council would not be paying for value. Otherwise, we might be wasting public resources.
Architectural designs may be considered good or bad, it is purely a subjective judgement. The Democratic Party does not recommend ruling out the Architectural Services Department as a project consultant or designer of this Council. However, we feel that open competition should be introduced for major (costing over $12 million) and central projects.
We should also draw up separate lists of consultancy firms for large and small projects. There is nothing new to this arrangement. Within the Planning Department, different lists of consultancy firms are kept in respect of projects of different scales.
For the design stage, we propose that a standing professional assessment system be introduced. This is in line with the proposals of two fellow Members who have spoken. Represented on the panel should be professional bodies including the Hong Kong Institute of Architects and the Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors and internationally renowned architects with specialized
Page 248 of 654