【明報專訊】AFTER the five-alarm blaze at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po, reports of faked scaffold netting inspections in housing estates have come thick and fast. Under the current Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme (MBIS), the authorities merely set the rules, shoving oversight onto property owners and Owners' Corporations (OCs). The snag? Homeowners lack the technical know-how to keep watch; with bid rigging syndicates infiltrating OCs, they are sitting ducks. To clean up this long-running mess, officials must reform the system, beef up government scrutiny and stop playing spectator.

Hong Kong's buildings are ageing fast, and old blocks abound. The MBIS push launched more than a decade ago was sound in principle, but weak oversight has turned the scheme into a hotbed of graft: cartel bid rigging has flourished, costs have ballooned, and even basic fire safety gets short shrift. In the name of "owner autonomy", the government has dumped scrutiny on residents without enough expert back-up or industry policing, letting rogues run the show and smear the whole industry.

Broadly, homeowners' groups fall into two camps: Owners' Committees and OCs. The former are purely advisory—they liaise with management firms but can neither oversee estate affairs nor inspect the books, earning them the derisive nickname of toothless tigers; OCs are statutory bodies with fiscal control and the clout to sack managers. On paper, elected OCs should have the muscle to safeguard MBIS works. In practice, it's another story.

Most small owners haven't a clue about engineering specs—and even officials admit contractors are sly operators, palming off subpar safety nets to dodge random checks. Little surprise that ordinary owners miss the ruse. With real power in OC hands, bid rigging cartels and rogue professionals go all out to woo, infiltrate or collude with them to grab contracts. Once crooks seize control, small owners are easy prey.

Over the years, OC members have been embroiled in scandals: self-dealing, abuse of power, murky books. Graft cases of contractors conniving with consultants, OCs and managers have become grimly familiar. The MBIS regime is riddled with holes: opaque information and know-how gaps leave homeowners blind. The government must step up with direct oversight and stop overloading responsibility onto homeowners.

Bid rigging in MBIS projects has been festering for years, shielded by vested interests that bristle at reform. Officials should set up a credible, expert body to oversee building repairs across the city, manage disputes and arbitrate. If the government continues to hide behind property-rights orthodoxy to avoid deeper intervention, the public will be left sorely disappointed.

明報社評2025.12.05：業主法團把關力不從心 大維修監管須根本改革

大埔宏福苑五級火後，接連有屋苑棚網檢測報告被揭作假。現行樓宇大維修政策，當局只是制訂規則，變相將把關和監督的責任交給業主及法團。問題是小業主缺乏相關專業知識，難以把關；法團被圍標集團滲透，小業主更如俎上肉任人宰割。當局若要糾正大維修工程亂象，必須改革制度，加強政府把關及監管的角色，不能只當旁觀者。

香港樓宇老化，舊樓林立。政府10多年前推動樓宇大維修，本是好事，然而監管制度缺失，令大維修工程淪為貪腐溫牀，集團式圍標抬價禁之不絕，天價維修工程時有所聞，連最基本的防火安全也沒做好。政府以「業主自主自治」之名，將大維修工程的把關責任交到業主手上，卻沒提供足夠專業支援，針對業界的監管亦不到位，令到害群之馬得以上下其手，敗壞整個行業。

本港業主組織大致分為業主委員會及業主立案法團兩類。兩者最大分別在於業委會僅屬諮詢組織，負責協助業主和管理公司溝通，無權插手屋苑管理及查核整份財政報告，因而常被譏為「無牙老虎」；法團則獲法例賦予財政獨立、可以廢除管理公司等實權。表面上，法團作為業主票選產生的組織，有足夠權力為大維修工程把關，然而實際情况又是另一回事。

小業主大多缺乏有關維修工程的專業知識，當政府官員也承認承辦商相當「蠱惑」，以魚目混珠手法隱瞞使用不達標棚網，避開當局抽取，一般小業主就更不大可能發現當中有詐。由於法團握有實權，圍標集團和業界害群之馬為了取得工程合約，千方百計拉攏、滲透甚或串通法團，一旦腐敗之徒控制法團，小業主更任人魚肉。

這些年來，不時有屋苑法團成員捲入監守自盜、濫權或帳目不清等爭端，承建商與工程顧問、法團和物管公司人員串謀圍標的貪污案件，亦不罕見。現行的大維修監管模式千瘡百孔，資訊的不透明，專業知識水平的差距，令到小業主難以監察大維修工程。政府必須加強介入，扮演更大更直接的監管角色，不應將責任過度推給小業主。

大維修工程圍標等亂象存在多年，離不開既得利益阻撓改革。政府應考慮成立一個具公信力兼專業知識的專責部門，負責管理及監管全港屋苑大廈維修，以至仲裁糾紛。如果當局還以尊重私有產權一類原則為由，不願加強介入，難免令公眾失望。

■ Glossary 生字 /

cartel : a group of separate companies that agree to increase profits by fixing prices and not competing with each other

sly : acting or done in a secret or dishonest way, often intending to trick people

ruse : a way of doing sth or of getting sth by cheating sb