Click-on these handy "jump links" to quickly access the news item
you're looking for.

1. KCRC boss has no regrets over track record

2. Private property plan blasted

1. KCRC boss has no regrets over track record
AGNES LAM, SCMP, 30 December 2003

KCRC chief executive officer Yeung Kai-yin at the rail operator's Fo Tan headquarters yesterday. He retires tomorrow. Picture by K.Y.Cheng

Retiring KCRC chief executive Yeung Kai-yin will probably be best remembered for his role in the Siemens controversy and the cost-overrun of the West Rail project.

But as he prepares to bow out of the job, he has no regrets.

"I must say I am very happy that I finally finished my mission which is finishing the West Rail project," he said yesterday.

Mr Yeung will leave the Kowloon-Canton Rail Corporation tomorrow when his two-year contract expires. He will continue to serve as the chairman of the Vocational Training Council until 2005.

"It is normal to have mistakes when one is dealing [with] such a big project. I don't consider that a regret in my seven years of service at the KCRC," Mr Yeung said.

Last year, the KCRC had to pay an extra $100 million to Siemens to complete work on a telecommunication project for West Rail after it fell behind on its work schedule. West Rail opened on December 20.

A report by Ernst & Young, which investigated the KCRC payment to the telecommunication giant, said Siemens was paid the extra money even though it had failed to meet contractual requirements.

The KCRC was criticised for not properly investigating Siemens' tender bid of $287 million for the project. Mr Yeung later defended the payment, saying it was needed to avoid further delays to the West Rail opening.

Mr Yeung and KCRC chairman Michael Tien Puk-sun, who was hired after the Siemens incident, had to apologise publicly for the controversy.

Since taking over the chairmanship two years ago, Mr Tien has been perceived as having sidelined his chief executive. Mr Yeung was frequently seen standing silently nearby as his boss announced major events or spoke with reporters.

Mr Yeung's relationship with Mr Tien publicly turned sour, when Mr Tien denied he was "his good friend" at a press conference about the Siemens controversy.

But yesterday Mr Yeung spoke well of his boss.

"Mr Tien and I just do our best for the KCRC. He is responsible for making major decisions and I am responsible for carrying out policies. Co-operation ties us together," he said.

"I wish him the best of luck.

"I worked in the civil service for 32 years and seven years in the KCRC, I can honestly say that I have no regrets in my life and I find my work very satisfying because I always keep on trying till I succeed," Mr Yeung said.

2. Private property plan blasted
Michael Ng , The Standard 30 December 2003

A property owners association has expressed grave reservations over the government's proposal for a one-stop property management and maintenance service for private buildings.

The government's plan was outlined in a public consultation paper released yesterday by Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen.

The consultation exercise follows grave hygiene concerns raised during the Sars outbreak earlier this year during which it was found that many buildings were poorly maintained and some did not even have owner corporations.

One of the three options raised by Suen was to encourage property management companies to provide one-stop services that included building maintenance and management services, legal advice, fund management and periodic inspections of private buildings.

But Michael Shea, chairman of the Hong Kong Owners' Club, said this would give such companies too much power, making it difficult for owners to monitor them.

He said it was also known that some management companies were in league with contractors and, consequently, could force owners to pay for work that was not required.

There was also the problem of such companies misappropriating funds, as was the case with one company earlier this year. Suen replied said the bureau would be willing to investigate such complaints.

``If we receive a complaint that a certain company has advised owners to conduct maintenance work exceeding actual needs, we could commission a third party to make a fair assessment,'' he said.

Apart from the one-stop property management and maintenance service, Suen also said the government could demand that owners of private buildings conduct periodic inspections. The third option would be to maintain the status quo. Suen said the government did not have any specific preference but warned that it was responsibility of property owners to maintain, or pay the cost for maintaining, their buildings.

In a Legislative Council session yesterday, lawmakers said the consultation paper lacked concrete content.

``It was the most hollow public consultation paper I have even seen in the past 10 years. The paper has depicted the problems but not provided solutions,'' said democrat lawmaker James To. Architectural, surveying and planning sector lawmaker Lau Ping-cheung said options raised by the government were basically inapplicable. ``If the government does not resolve the problem of 700,000 illegal structures in private buildings, no property management company will be willing to take up the job as no insurance company will provide cover for these buildings,'' he said.