Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
174
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
The amended tender documents and services contracts are being introduced in the new cleansing services contracts. The Department will closely monitor the effectiveness of the various improvement measures and report the progress to the Administration Select Committee in due course.
Mr. Chan Choi-Hi (in Cantonese):—Mr. Chairman, I wish to follow up on one point. As the reply from the RSD is a bit late, I have not been able to examine in detail the difference between the provisions of the USD and those of the RSD. I wonder whether Mr. SUEN has the information in this aspect. Is there in fact a great difference between the new measures of the Department and the existing measures of the RSD? Can this be elaborated? I can see that section 15.2 of the contracting-out contracts of the RSD clearly states that 'the monthly wage of a worker must not be less than HK$5,000 while that of a foreman, not less than HK$9,000.' The figures are specifically written down in the above provision. I wonder whether the Department has laid down such a provision.
The second follow-up question is about item (6) on page 3 of the written reply. I find these monitoring measures a bit passive, because as stated, if the contractor has not met the standard or made any improvement, the only consequence will be that his tender for the next year might be affected. I don't see any immediate penalty being imposed by the Department. I wonder whether Mr. SUEN would agree to the adoption of some immediate measures, so that follow-up action may be readily taken to punish those who breach the contracts or capitalists who deprive workers of a reasonable wage.
MR. SUEN KAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):—I do not have full information about the provisions of the contracts of the RSD, but my reply has been based on the RSD's official reply to the Department in which the RSD considers that the principle of 'fair wage' differs from the concept of 'minimum wage'. As to how they interpret the concepts of 'minimum wage' and 'fair wage', I believe it is more appropriate for the RSD to explain. I do not consider that I am in a position to explain on their behalf.
The second point is about the penalty. We know that in actual operation, the same contractor might be tendering for other contracts at the same time or on an on-going basis. If a cleansing contract for a market has been awarded and the contractor has breached the requirements stipulated in the tender, penalty can be meted out without having to wait until the expiry of the contract because the contractor might be submitting another tender in the next month or next week and we will take into account the prevailing performance of the contractor in assessing the tender. This can be regarded as effective monitoring. There is no need to impose penalty until the contract expires and is due for renewal. It can in fact be imposed in respect of a new tender, in which the past performance of the tenderer constitutes a main factor for consideration.
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
Page 177 of 606
174
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
The amended tender documents and services contracts are being introduced in the new cleansing services contracts. The Department will closely monitor the effectiveness of the various improvement measures and report the progress to the Administration Select Committee in due course.
Mr. Chan Ch01-HI (in Cantonese);—Mr. Chairman. I wish to follow up on one point. As the reply from the RSD is a bit late. I have not been able to examine in detail the difference between the provisions of the USD and those of the RSD. I wonder whether Mr. SUEN has the information in this aspect. Is there in fact a great difference between the new measures of the Department and the existing measures of the RSD? Can this be elaborated? I can see that section 15.2 of the contracting-out contracts of the RSD clearly states that 'the monthly wage of a worker must not be less than HK$5,000 while that of a foreman, not less than HK$9,000. The figures are specifically written down in the above provision. I wonder whether the Department has laid down such a provision.
The second follow-up question is about item (6) on page 3 of the written reply. I find these monitoring measures a bit passive, because as stated, if the contractor has not met the standard or made any improvement, the only consequence will be that his tender for the next year might be affected. I don't see any immediate penalty being imposed by the Department. I wonder whether Mr. SUEN would agree to the adoption of some immediate measures, so that follow-up action may be readily taken to punish those who breach the contracts or capitalists who deprive workers of a reasonable wage.
MR. SUEN KAI-CHEONG (in Cantonese):-I do not have full information about the provisions of the contracts of the RSD, but my reply has been based on the RSD's official reply to the Department in which the RSD considers that the principle of 'fair wage' differs from the concept of 'minimum wage'. As to how they interpret the concepts of 'minimum wage' and 'fair wage', I believe it is more appropriate for the RSD to explain. I do not consider that I am in a position to explain on their behalf.
The second point is about the penalty. We know that in actual operation, the same contractor might be tendering for other contracts at the same time or on an on-going basis. If a cleansing contract for a market has been awarded and the contractor has breached the requirements stipulated in the tender, penalty can be meted out without having to wait until the expiry of the contract because the contractor might be submitting another tender in the next month or next week and we will take into account the prevailing performance of the contractor in assessing the tender. This can be regarded as effective monitoring. There is no need to impose penalty until the contract expires and is due for renewal. It can in fact be imposed in respect of a new tender, in which the past performance of the tenderer constitutes a main factor for consideration.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.