布政司署
香港下亞
畢道
HKK23.4√1
本署檔號 OUR REF.:
RECEIVEC
* Your Ref.:
Mas Berbowa Scawthorne.
CONFIDENTIAL Diss. 831 6111
- 5 APR 1978
DEK OFFICE?
INDEX
sending
× 2674 some dog.
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
CAR
N. Thompson
LOWER ALBERT ROAD
HONG KONG
29 March, 1978
I cannot help feeling that
Houg Kog & Grappeparto a more fundamental approach
JAB Stewart
F CO
year
John,
प
Department
a
fir
is reqived to the problems of those forced to rely on public assistance for more than a year - merely handing them an extra
$500 (Neven $2400)
SOCIAL SECURITY : "THE LONG-TERM SUPPLEMENT"
[314
year seems scarcely adequate what happens the You will already be very familiar with the main K
UK? themes of the Government's policy on social security as outlined, for instance, in the Green Paper produced in November last year: "Help for those least able to help themselves: A programme for social security development" There is one point in that programme which has recently been under discussion in Exco and on which the Governor thought it would be helpful for you to have some additional background. This is the question of a "long-term supplement" to add to the existing scheme of public assistance.
2.
As you know, public assistance is paid to all (including, since April 1977, the able-bodied unemployed) who qualify on a family-calculated means test and with certain restrictions about a minimum period of residence in Hong Kong. The amount paid is designed to be sufficient to meet ordinary living expenses. Since February 1978 this sum has been fixed at $200 per month for a single individual and lesser amounts per individual for a family group.
3
This scheme provided a tolerable safety net, providing that those concerned were only on public assistance for a short time. What it did not do, however, was provide any means of replacing larger household items for those who had to remain on public assistance for a long time. Although the Public Assistance index has built into it a small amount for durables, essentially it covers only recurrent daily needs, not such things as new pots and pans, or new shoes, etc.
4.
The November Green Paper discussed the problem of such items of capital expenditure and proposed a "long-term supplement" which would be paid monthly to those who had been receiving assistance for over 18 months. (Paras. 4.11-4.15) The amount was to be the same for a family, regardless of size, as the monthly sum given to a single individual under public assistance (i.e. $200 post February 1978). However, the more
CONFIDENTIAL
/contd...