Hitting a brick wall

(The Standard P.22-23  14 Dec 2012)When buildings inspectors(檢查員) swooped at the two adjacent(相鄰的) homes in Kowloon Tong of former chief secretary Henry Tang Ying-yen in February to check for an illegal basement, the media hired cranes(起重機) to ensure better angles for camera crews and photographers.

Tang was then a candidate for chief executive of Hong Kong.

But when it came to June and a check on the Peak home of Leung Chun-ying - by then chief executive-elect - Buildings Department officers went about a quiet inspection. They only announced last month that they'd found a wall blocking an illegally built 320-square-foot basement.

To be sure, the widely(迴然) different treatment (對待) of illegal structures at the homes of two important people is being debated (爭論) with some venom(痛恨). There's talk of double standards.

The scandal of Tang's illegal basement derailed(出軌) his ambitions to become chief executive. He was the hot favorite for the job but then lost to Leung in March's election after very public revelations and teary admissions (含淚的承認) about a 2,200-square-foot leisure and pleasure facility beneath (之下) a swimming pool at his home.

But there's usually a twist in politics, and so there is here. Leung himself is deeply mired (使陷入困境) in an "illegal structure" saga and could be troubled for quite a while.

That is despite the dust cloud settling a bit after a motion of no confidence in him based on his less-than-complete answers or plain silence (完全地閉口不談) about additions to his home was shot down (被否決) in the Legislative Council on Wednesday. Civic Party lawmaker Kwok Ka-ki says: "Clearly, the Buildings Department staff might have come under heavy pressure to handle Leung's illegal structure row in a lenient manner compared with heavy-handed tactics adopted (採取拙劣的手段) Vin dealing with Tang's illegal basement saga."

Interestingly, the rivals (對手) could have got together on Tang's Kowloon Tong property long before all this unfolded (顯露).

Tang's family, we have learnt, had hired property consultancy firm DTZ - where Leung was Asia-Pacific chairman - to carry out surveying work when Tang planned to rebuild his residence at York Road 5A and 7 a decade ago.

Tang then went elsewhere to hire architects, engineers and designers to submit building plans and layouts (安排) to the authorities for approval. But that's just interesting history.

Much more a matter of the times is what has gone on since February this year when media reports bubbled up about the underpool facility.

A team of Buildings Department surveyors (勘測員) swiftly (迅速地) entered Tang's residence to carry out an inspection, which attracted a media horde. More than 10 cranes were set up for TV camera teams while dozens of photographers climbed the high walls to seek good angles.

A large posse (一隊) of surveyors and other official checkers and the media crowd laid on a circus that lasted for several hours.

This contrasted sharply (對比鮮明地) with Leung's case in June, Kwok notes. Buildings Department officials "even let Leung adopt (採取) delaying tactics(策略) in that he did not reply to their queries several times and they did not take any action. It's clear the department has adopted double standards (雙重標準) in handling the Tang and Leung cases."

Tang's case is complicated (複雜的). The story that came out is that he and wife Lisa were going through a rough spell when the luxury home work was going on in Kowloon Tong and she'd overseen it. In fact, Tang said, the basement built in 2007 was Lisa's idea.

But Tang admitted that he had realized there was an illegal basement and that he'd failed to handle the issue promptly (迅速地). That, he said, was because of the marital (婚姻的) problems at the time.

Since last February's high profile (高姿態) callers (訪問者) at the Tang residence in Kowloon Tong, the Buildings Department has set up a seven-member taskforce(專門小組) to probe (徹底調查) the illegal basement and to study whether the family deliberately (蓄意地) concealed (隱瞞) a plan to build it before authorities issued an occupation permit (入伙紙).

The taskforce is led by chief building surveyor Thomas Leung Tung-choi backed by senior building surveyor Ko Kiu-kin and structural engineer Lam Chi-ming.

The investigators have by now entered Tang's residence many times for checks. Some can span (持續) weeks. Their work has included drilling (鑽孔) to collect samples of concrete (混凝土) from the basement for checking, the suggestion being that the time the concrete was laid (準備) can be determined by scientific analysis (科學的分析). So there are about 100 holes in the basement, an insider told Standard sister publication Eastweek.

Along with the Tang and his wife, investigators have interviewed dozens of potential witnesses, including contractors and engineers and designers who worked on the residence.

The Buildings Department officials are also poring over landfill dumping records to see if they can track (追蹤) where construction waste (建築廢料) from the basement could have been dumped. That's not so hard as it might appear, and findings could help investigators determine whether the basement was built before or after the occupation permit was issued.

The sleuthing (偵查) work was continuing this week, with a Buildings Department official visiting the Tang residence for around two hours on Monday. But he wouldn't say what he was doing there.

"The Buildings Department usually informs Tang's family three or four days before visits," says a source. "Tang and his wife have been cooperating (合作) and helping in the investigation.

"On one occasion, Tang's side wrote a letter to department officials asking them to delay a visit for a week as they wanted to arrange to have their own professional advisers (專業顧問) there. But a department official cited (引用) the powers they have under the Buildings Ordinance to reject that request."

This source also questions why the department staff did not push along smartly when an "illegal structure" was found in Leung's residence. Leung was just sent reminders (催函) to deliver (發表) an explanation.

As for the work that the Building Department team is continuing to go about at the Tang home, Wong Hon- ping, a principal lecturer in construction at the Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education, said he's never heard that examining concrete samples can fix the exact time of construction.

"The most appropriate (適當的) way to check when structures were built is to study plans that show what structures existed at a specific time," he adds.

Looking back to The Peak, Yiu Chung-yim, a visiting lecturer (客座講師) in the Polytechnic (理工) University's Department of Building and Real Estate, notes: "The Buildings Department has not yet said whether it has investigated if the basement at Leung's residence was built before or after the issuance of the occupation permits and if any person had concealed (隱瞞) plans."

Yiu also questions the basis for Buildings Department investigators determining in June that the basement in Leung's residence posed no danger if they did not open the wall to check its condition.

That was the month the illegal structure began blowing up in Leung's face as he prepared to take office (開始就職) on July 1.

Leung went silent on the issue for several months, citing as a reason that he could not speak out the fact that an election challenge by the third chief executive candidate, the Democratic Party's Albert Ho Chun-yan, was before a court.

Ho's claim was that Leung had not been legally elected chief executive in March because of false (不誠實的) statements about illegal structures during the election campaign.

It was on November 23, after the court rejected Ho's argument, that Leung issued a statement revealing (揭露) for the first time there was not just one unauthorized structure at his Peak home but 10. He did that in Chinese only on the chief executive's website.

Leung said he'd built a wall to seal the basement room at his House No 4 Peel Rise last November, or four months before the chief executive election.

An open yard space there was also altered to accommodate a guest toilet (which the Building Department ruled would count as an unauthorized structure). Other features (特徵) that were added without official approvals included a metal gate, a parking space cover and a small storage(倉庫) structure.

Lack integrity

Leung, meanwhile, continued to apologize and say repeatedly that he'd been negligent (疏忽的)  in failing to act on the structures at an early stage but insisted he did not lack integrity (缺乏誠信).

The Buildings Department also said last month that its inspectors had been aware of the walled-off(用牆隔開) basement for a while and had asked Leung in a June 27 letter and three subsequent (隨後的) reminders to provide information on it. Leung failed to reply to any of the requests but has now explained that because of Ho's court action he was advised by lawyers not to make any comment on authorized structures. That he could not provide "a timely response [was] much against my own wishes."

With the legal proceedings (訴訟) cleared, he also said on November 23 that he hoped "a complete and detailed account" would "clarify facts and address concerns of the community.

"As I purchased the property 13 years ago and I cannot rely (依靠) solely (僅僅) on memory to provide a full account, I appointed(任命) a professional team. Based on their professional advice and available records, documents and photos, I have tried my best to give an objective and comprehensive explanation (全面的解釋) of the situation."

If Leung thought this was straight (坦白地) talk that could take the wind out of the sails of his foes (仇敵) and lay (平息) to rest (停止) some of the doubts(懷疑) about his integrity, he was in for a rude shock.

Legislators railed (責罵) against Leung and said he should resign. Calls for him to answer questions from legislators went unheeded (未受到注意) until Monday, when he went before the Legislative Council to be grilled about the add-on at his home.

It was a torrid (烘熱的) 90 minutes, with Leung hearing the voice of his bitter rival (充滿仇恨的對手) ring out (響起) once again, though not directly.

No confidence

A recorded voice of Henry Tang saying "You are lying!" to Leung was replayed over and over again by Raymond "Mad Dog" Wong Yuk-man of People Power. Tang had made the accusation (指控) during an election debate with Leung in March.

The recording was played again the following day by People Power activists at a public consultation forum on the policy address and the budget held by Leung in Chai Wan.

Still, Leung got off (動身) more lightly (輕率地) on Wednesday when the motion of no confidence (不信任動議) in him was voted down(被罷免).But more questions are being raised.

For instance, also on Wednesday buildings inspectors said they had not yet been able to determine (確定) whether there are illegal features (特徵) connected with a Stanley flat owned by Leung, which now has a tenant.

The inspectors had been sent there after a media report of an "illegal chamber (房間)" between Leung's premises (房宅) and a man-made slope behind the building, though the claim is nothing new.

The matter had also been raised in the legislature on Monday. Lawmaker Tam Yiu-chung of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong asked Leung whether there was any illegal chamber connected to his Stanley flat. Leung replied that Buildings Department inspectors did not find any illegal structures there during a visit last year.

We can expect more of the same in the coming weeks, and no doubt we will continue to hear more assurances (表示保證) from the Buildings Department that its officers go about their work without fear (恐懼) or favor (偏袒) - a line they have just trotted out again.

However, Leung is going to have to open his doors wide and turn on all the lights if he is to close the curtains on those who say he cannot be trusted.

We'll be hearing a lot more from them to get 2013 off to an angry start. The organizers of a New Year's Day protest against Leung are hoping about 100,000 people will show up (出席).

Eddie Luk