HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
245
I would like to have adequate public consultation on the competition system. Besides having professional adjudication, members of the public should be given the chance to choose. This emphasizes participation and cultivates identification.
Our existing contracting out system puts the ASD at a position to initiate. The ASD invites architects to submit designs. I think this should be changed. In the long run, I think this Council should get back the initiative. For the short term, I hope medium and small scale architect firms can participate in our contracting out system. At present, the system is run on competition with the lowest bid winning the project. We keep one list only. For building contractors, they are divided into categories and first and second lists are kept. I think we should ask the ASD to draw up more lists or classify firms so that even small and medium scale firms can compete. It will encourage diversification of architectural styles.
Basically, the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement of 1973 laid down parameters within which we operate. This Memorandum cannot meet with the needs of 1997 and it fails in coping with the needs of the 21st Century. There are many restrictive rules in the Memorandum resulting in monopoly for Government departments. We must break this up. The crux of the problem in handling our relationship with two departments is still in the Memorandum. There is therefore great need to review it. We should discuss with the Government of HKSAR on the possibility of dispensing with the service of the Architectural Services Department.
We need to open up the market and draw in the element of competition. It will upgrade the quality of public architecture, the quality of our citizens' lives and provide better public facilities. Other metropolitan cities round the world treat plans for cultural facilities and other public architecture seriously and they introduce competitions. For example, the Shanghai Opera House is the result of an open competition. The large cultural centre of Singapore to be completed in 2000 is the result of an international selection system. Our attitude towards large scale public architecture lags far behind Shanghai and Singapore.
We are now at the dawning of a new age. I hope this Council will discuss with Government for removal of the clause to use the service of the Architectural Services Department. This will boost the quality of our public architecture to a new level and reflect the cultural standard of Hong Kong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STANLEY NG Wing-fat (in Cantonese):—I represent the Democratic Party in seconding Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG's motion. You can see that there is a slight difference between the English and Chinese versions. In the English version, there are items a, b, c with a referring to the assessment system, c
Page 246 of 654
Page 246 of 654
Page 246 of 654
HONG KONG PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
245
I would like to have adequate public consultation on the competition system. Besides having professional adjudication, members of the public should be given the chance to choose. This emphasizes participation and cultivates identification.
Our existing contracting out system puts the ASD at a position to initiate. The ASD invites architects to submit designs. I think this should be changed. In the long run, I think this Council should get back the initiative. For the short term, I hope medium and small scale architect firms can participate in our contracting out system. At present, the system is run on competition with the lowest bid winning the project. We keep one list only. For building contractors, they are divided into categories and first and second lists are kept. I think we should ask the ASD to draw up more lists or classify firms so that even small and medium scale firms can compete. It will encourage diversification of architectural styles.
Basically, the Memorandum of Administrative Arrangement of 1973 laid down parameters within which we operate. This Memorandum cannot meet with the needs of 1997 and it fails in coping with the needs of the 21st Century. There are many restrictive rules in the Memorandum resulting in monopoly for Government departments. We must break this up. The crux of the problem in handling our relationship with two departments is still in the Memorandum. There is therefore great need to review it. We should discuss with the Government of HKSAR on the possibility of dispensing with the service of the Architectural Services Department.
We need to open up the market and draw in the element of competition. It will upgrade the quality of public architecture, the quality of our citizens' lives and provide better public facilities. Other metropolitan cities round the world treat plans for cultural facilities and other public architecture seriously and they introduce competitions. For example, the Shanghai Opera House is the result of an open competition. The large cultural centre of Singapore to be completed in 2000 is the result of an international selection system. Our attitude towards large scale public architecture lags far behind Shanghai and Singapore.
We are now at the dawning of a new age. I hope this Council will discuss with Government for removal of the clause to use the service of the Architectural Services Department. This will boost the quality of our public architecture to a new level and reflect the cultural standard of Hong Kong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STANLEY NG Wing-fat (in Cantonese):—I represent the Democratic Party in seconding Mr. Ambrose CHEUNG's motion. You can see that there is a slight difference between the English and Chinese versions. In the English version, there are items a, b, c with a referring to the assessment system, c
Page 246 of 654
Page 246 of 654
Page 246 of 654
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.