【明報專訊】IT may take long to complete a project. When it is under way, unforeseeable things may happen - unfavourable weather or man-made untoward(反常) occurrences. However, allowances may be made for such factors when it is on the drawing board. Additional funding will be needed if an unfavourable situation arises. It is the watchdog's duty to make sure that, though there is a cost overrun, neither money nor time will be wasted.
According to a story included in this issue of Ming Pao, building works are supervised differently from infrastructure projects and civil engineering works. It is hard to imagine why government departments (which attach great importance to systematisation) have adopted a system so incomprehensible to citizens. Building works are supervised by independent quantity surveyors appointed by the government. In the case of an infrastructure project or civil engineering works, it is an engineering consultancy that is responsible for its design, the supervision of its progress and its cost control. When claims arise because of design changes, the possibility of a conflict of roles occurring cannot be ruled out. The consultancy may then be under suspicion of "self-approval".
The government's explanation is that it is necessary to have independent surveyors supervise building works because they, involving the use of many kinds of materials, are very complicated, while civil engineering works may be supervised by the engineers in charge of them because they are relatively simple. It has pointed out that this is a practice of long standing among architects, surveyors and engineers, adding that so far no causal links have been established between this practice and cost overruns.
One may say the explanation falls short of the expectations society has of the government. In a society where the supervision of the authorities is considered of great importance, fairness, like justice, matters very much. The more transparent such measures are, the better it will be. Controversy has arisen because the government's explanation that the practice has long been in place does not dispel doubts(驅散疑慮). Will it be possible to minimise mistakes in supervision and thereby save more public money if even infrastructure projects and civil engineering works are supervised by independent surveyors? It must be understood that fairness is just like justice, which must not only be done but also be seen to be done. After all(more important), in a mature society, the government can, by introducing independent supervision and increasing transparency, minimise costs that may arise from the lack of such mechanisms, including the public's doubts and attendant negative factors.
There are two totally different systems for supervising government projects because government departments act on their own. The government must rectify this "two-system" situation instead of hiding behind the shield of "common practice". Evidently, the government must take these questions seriously, for the public may doubt that the cost overrun of a project (which may easily amount to $10 billion) presents "good value for money" and suspect that the taxpayer is often fleeced(被宰). Unless it handles this issue satisfactorily, the government, whose popularity cannot be called very high, will have difficulty coping with another blow at its credibility.
明報社評 2015.01.05﹕一工兩制大幅超支 政出多門易生弊端
一項工程的建築過程漫長，其間或會出現不可預計的因素，例如大自然帶來的天氣變幻，或是當中發生事前難以預視的人為事故；不過，這都可以在之前的規劃當中預留空間以作補足。當然，發生不能預見的情况後就需追加支出。如何做到就算要面對超支而不至於枉花金錢及時間，這是監管方面的責任。
本報今天報道的政府工程「一工兩制」，樓宇工程（Building Works）的監察與基建或土木工程（Civil Engineering Works）的監察竟是如此迥異，很難想像講究制度化的政府部門會出現這種不能令巿民理解的制度。樓宇工程的監察是政府委任獨立的工料測量師，直接向政府負責；基建或土木工程方面，由設計、監察進度以及成本控制，全部由一間工程顧問公司負責，一旦涉及改動設計等申索，角色衝突可能性不能排除，這麼一來，就可能變成有「自己批自己」之嫌。
政府方面的說法是樓宇工程與基建或土木工程繁瑣程度迥異，前者有涉及多種工料項目，後者相對簡單，因此需要的監察做法則是前者需要獨立測量師，後者則是工程師兼任便可，並指出這種分工的做法，在建築師、測量師以及工程師界別「沿用已久」，現在階段尚未有確立這種做法與超支的關係。
這一種解說可謂脫離了當前社會對政府施政的期許，因為在一個重視監察權力的社會，公平公正極為重要，這方面的透明度更是愈高愈好。如今的爭論點在於政府以「沿用已久」作為解釋，卻未能令到質疑的一方信服，即倘若連基建或土木工程都採用獨立測量師監督，是否可以把在監督過程中出現的錯誤減到最少，從而節省更多的公帑支出。須知道，正如公義一樣，公平公正也必須達至，而且要令人看到已經達至（must also be seen to be done）。况且，增加獨立監察及透明度，如果在一個成熟的社會推行，更可以減少因為欠缺這種機制下的其他成本，包括面對社會的質疑及因此滋生的其他負面因素。
既然是政府所管轄的工程項目，卻因為政出多門而出現兩種截然不同的監察制度，一工兩制有着改正的需要，而不是動輒以慣常做法去做擋箭牌。特區政府看來應認真面對這些問題，因為動輒十億百億的超支是否「物有所值」，巿民會否成為冤大頭，都可能成為公眾的質疑。若處理欠善，本來民望就不是很高的政府，難以再受另一次公信力的衝擊。
Glossary
untoward﹕unusual and unexpected, and usually unpleasant
on the drawing board﹕being prepared or considered
fleece﹕A person who is fleeced is made to pay a lot of money.
According to a story included in this issue of Ming Pao, building works are supervised differently from infrastructure projects and civil engineering works. It is hard to imagine why government departments (which attach great importance to systematisation) have adopted a system so incomprehensible to citizens. Building works are supervised by independent quantity surveyors appointed by the government. In the case of an infrastructure project or civil engineering works, it is an engineering consultancy that is responsible for its design, the supervision of its progress and its cost control. When claims arise because of design changes, the possibility of a conflict of roles occurring cannot be ruled out. The consultancy may then be under suspicion of "self-approval".
The government's explanation is that it is necessary to have independent surveyors supervise building works because they, involving the use of many kinds of materials, are very complicated, while civil engineering works may be supervised by the engineers in charge of them because they are relatively simple. It has pointed out that this is a practice of long standing among architects, surveyors and engineers, adding that so far no causal links have been established between this practice and cost overruns.
One may say the explanation falls short of the expectations society has of the government. In a society where the supervision of the authorities is considered of great importance, fairness, like justice, matters very much. The more transparent such measures are, the better it will be. Controversy has arisen because the government's explanation that the practice has long been in place does not dispel doubts(驅散疑慮). Will it be possible to minimise mistakes in supervision and thereby save more public money if even infrastructure projects and civil engineering works are supervised by independent surveyors? It must be understood that fairness is just like justice, which must not only be done but also be seen to be done. After all(more important), in a mature society, the government can, by introducing independent supervision and increasing transparency, minimise costs that may arise from the lack of such mechanisms, including the public's doubts and attendant negative factors.
There are two totally different systems for supervising government projects because government departments act on their own. The government must rectify this "two-system" situation instead of hiding behind the shield of "common practice". Evidently, the government must take these questions seriously, for the public may doubt that the cost overrun of a project (which may easily amount to $10 billion) presents "good value for money" and suspect that the taxpayer is often fleeced(被宰). Unless it handles this issue satisfactorily, the government, whose popularity cannot be called very high, will have difficulty coping with another blow at its credibility.
明報社評 2015.01.05﹕一工兩制大幅超支 政出多門易生弊端
一項工程的建築過程漫長，其間或會出現不可預計的因素，例如大自然帶來的天氣變幻，或是當中發生事前難以預視的人為事故；不過，這都可以在之前的規劃當中預留空間以作補足。當然，發生不能預見的情况後就需追加支出。如何做到就算要面對超支而不至於枉花金錢及時間，這是監管方面的責任。
本報今天報道的政府工程「一工兩制」，樓宇工程（Building Works）的監察與基建或土木工程（Civil Engineering Works）的監察竟是如此迥異，很難想像講究制度化的政府部門會出現這種不能令巿民理解的制度。樓宇工程的監察是政府委任獨立的工料測量師，直接向政府負責；基建或土木工程方面，由設計、監察進度以及成本控制，全部由一間工程顧問公司負責，一旦涉及改動設計等申索，角色衝突可能性不能排除，這麼一來，就可能變成有「自己批自己」之嫌。
政府方面的說法是樓宇工程與基建或土木工程繁瑣程度迥異，前者有涉及多種工料項目，後者相對簡單，因此需要的監察做法則是前者需要獨立測量師，後者則是工程師兼任便可，並指出這種分工的做法，在建築師、測量師以及工程師界別「沿用已久」，現在階段尚未有確立這種做法與超支的關係。
這一種解說可謂脫離了當前社會對政府施政的期許，因為在一個重視監察權力的社會，公平公正極為重要，這方面的透明度更是愈高愈好。如今的爭論點在於政府以「沿用已久」作為解釋，卻未能令到質疑的一方信服，即倘若連基建或土木工程都採用獨立測量師監督，是否可以把在監督過程中出現的錯誤減到最少，從而節省更多的公帑支出。須知道，正如公義一樣，公平公正也必須達至，而且要令人看到已經達至（must also be seen to be done）。况且，增加獨立監察及透明度，如果在一個成熟的社會推行，更可以減少因為欠缺這種機制下的其他成本，包括面對社會的質疑及因此滋生的其他負面因素。
既然是政府所管轄的工程項目，卻因為政出多門而出現兩種截然不同的監察制度，一工兩制有着改正的需要，而不是動輒以慣常做法去做擋箭牌。特區政府看來應認真面對這些問題，因為動輒十億百億的超支是否「物有所值」，巿民會否成為冤大頭，都可能成為公眾的質疑。若處理欠善，本來民望就不是很高的政府，難以再受另一次公信力的衝擊。
Glossary
untoward﹕unusual and unexpected, and usually unpleasant
on the drawing board﹕being prepared or considered
fleece﹕A person who is fleeced is made to pay a lot of money.
沒有留言:
發佈留言