There appears to be many cases of non-compliance across various engineering systems in the news recently.
We have seen some cases of lifts that cannot operate smoothly in a hospital, and lifts missing vital fire-protection components in housing estates.
We have also seen buildings that have been missing steel reinforcements, disasters such as the Tai Po public housing fire last year.
What has happened recently that caused these?
Let me hazard a guess: It is the gradual deterioration of professional spirit in our work.
We have an established system governing professionals. As engineering systems are complicated and involve public safety, we turn to professionals to ensure safety compliance. Invariably, this involves human judgement.
But judgement allows some latitude of what is acceptable and what is not. The law sets an absolute limit of what cannot be accepted, but professionals must operate at a level substantially higher than the law.
The established system in Hong Kong is that while the Police Force guards against breaches of the law, professional institutions are responsible to ensure good professional conduct, which operates at a level much higher than that required by law. This system has long been used not only for engineers, but for medical and legal professionals, among many others.
Our government authorities must act to ensure nothing breaches the law, as such threatens public safety. But beyond that, society as a whole must ensure a high standard of professionalism. It is already too late when a breach has occurred. Penalties serve only as a deterrent, a weak one at that, if the cost is insignificant when measured against the commercial gain from cutting corners.
Professionals have gone through a process of accredited education and received structured training. They are interviewed by experienced peers to establish that these processes had been strictly observed, ensuring they possess the relevant competence to practice and follow good ethics.
But this system breaks down when professionals compromise their judgement. Lack of competence is unlikely the issue; more often, it stems from cost-cutting to meet an artificially low budget, or motivations to maximize one’s monetary gain. These individuals clearly know they are treading past the limits of sound professional judgement but still choose to ignore it. That is why they end up in court.
The fact that such breaches are becoming frequent is worrying, and shows signs of a systemic weakness.
Firstly, are we sure that, when professional qualifications are granted, the recipients have been duly assessed to be competent? From my personal standpoint, I do not see any evidence of deterioration in the assessment process that could cause the recent incidents.
Secondly, are the regulatory systems weak, leading to the increased number of incidents? I would suspect not; said systems are tried and true and continuously updated, sometimes to the point that threatens to be counterproductive. The suggestion of increasing penalties is likely to fall into this category.
Thirdly, I would suggest that it is not possible to institute 100 percent inspection for all systems, as such would require huge resources that we will not be able to afford.
Meanwhile, we should also examine why some professionals has chosen to ignore ethics and take risks. Is it because of increasing commercial pressure, or greed?
I hope we can find the root cause as well as bring old-fashioned trustworthiness back to the profession.
Veteran engineer Edmund Leung Kwong-ho casts an expert eye over features of modern life
