HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Annex 6
Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood
'In view of the increased demand from the public for market services and to increase the competitiveness of UC markets, USD is asked to study contracting management of some of the markets under its operation to private companies.'
9 April 1996
Mr. Chairman,
First of all, I represent the Association to state our endorsement of the position stated in this motion. It does not mean we are in favour of the direction to privatise market management. Although in the motion, there is the obvious assumption that privatisation will boost competitiveness of markets, we have doubts and reservations about the assumption. However, as the focal point of the motion is to ask the Urban Services Department to study its feasibility, we endorse it.
We believe privatisation of markets at this stage will create management problems. There are a large number of stalls in our markets and they are all for resiting on-street hawkers. Our citizens cannot bid for the stalls by choice. Since the Council cannot scrutinise beforehand those qualified or not qualified to move into markets and hawkers are of very different backgrounds, we have to rely on the Department to take strong enforcement actions so as to maintain orderly management in our markets.
Compared to the situation of markets in public estates, some people may say that privatised ones are more efficient. However, before making that kind of comparison, we must be careful. First of all, there are fewer stalls in estate markets and hence the management burden is lighter. Traders who do business there have all gone through the bidding and selection process. The Housing Department is also empowered to terminate contracts with those found to have contravened the management codes. Viewed this way, it can be seen that management of such markets is easier.
What kind of problems will arise if UC markets are managed by private companies? First of all, I think we have to consider the division of power between the management company and the Department. Are we supposed to make the management company wholly responsible for management, including the power to enforce the law? As I mentioned just now, because of the different backgrounds of hawkers in UC markets, the private management company will face great difficulties in taking law enforcement actions squarely and effectively. As such, before we introduce privatisation, we must balance the pros and cons. At this stage, we have reservations.
Page 69 of 498
Page 69 of 498
Page
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Annex 6
Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood
'In view of the increased demand from the public for market services and to increase the competitiveness of UC markets, USD is asked to study contracting management of some of the markets under its operation to private companies.'
9 April 1996
Mr. Chairman,
First of all, I represent the Association to state our endorsement of the position stated in this motion. It does not mean we are in favour of the direction to privatise market management. Although in the motion, there is the obvious assumption that privatisation will boost competitiveness of markets, we have doubts and reservations about the assumption. However, as the focal point of the motion is to ask the Urban Services Department to study its feasibility, we endorse it.
We believe privatisation of markets at this stage will create management problems. There are a large number of stalls in our markets and they are all for resiting on-street hawkers. Our citizens cannot bid for the stalls by choice. Since the Council cannot scrutinise beforehand those qualified or not qualified to move into markets and hawkers are of very different backgrounds, we have to rely on the Department to take strong enforcement actions so as to maintain orderly management in our markets.
Compared to the situation of markets in public estates, some people may say that privatised ones are more efficient. However, before making that kind of comparison, we must be careful. First of all, there are fewer stalls in estate markets and hence the management burden is lighter. Traders who do business there have all gone through the bidding and selection process. The Housing Department is also empowered to terminate contracts with those found to have contravened the management codes. Viewed this way, it can be seen that management of such markets is easier.
What kind of problems will arise if UC markets are managed by private companies? First of all, I think we have to consider the division of power between the management company and the Department. Are we supposed to make the management company wholly responsible for management, including the power to enforce the law? As I mentioned just now, because of the different backgrounds of hawkers in UC markets, the private management company will face great difficulties in taking law enforcement actions squarely and effectively. As such, before we introduce privatisation, we must balance the pros and cons. At this stage, we have reservations.
Page 69 of 498
Page 69 of 498
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.