Date:
Time:
Reporter:
25.11.86
2.15
-
5 pm
PMS
1
2
I am referring to was the later statement that there was a delay of six years but that was not correct. That was in paragraph, paragraph the reference was the six year period, the revenue, the average annual 4 cost of a place in Form VI rose from 7,000, 13,000
3
5
6
7
8
9
CHAIRMAN:
D of E:
13,000.
Yes. That six year period was misleading
because it should be a three year period from September '83 to
September '86.
1S
10
jees,
:ix
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
26
27
28
29
30
31
35
36
☹ w w w w w g
MR CHEONG:
I am sorry, Mr Chairman. I think probably Mr Leung was too overtly concerned with defending his own department. Basically speaking, the sentence as I read it is: "In the six year period from 1980 to 1986 the average annual cost of a place in Form VI
rose from HK$7,000 to HK$13,000 whilst the fee remained at HK$800 a
year. Now is it or is it not a fact that the cost rose from HK$7,000
in 1980 to HK$13,000 in 1986?
11
D of E:
MR CHEONG:
That is correct, Mr Chairman.
So if that is correct, is it or is it not
correct that the fee remain at HK$800 a year from 1980 to 1986?
D of E:
Yes,
that also is correct but what I was
saying was that the implied implication, the implied criticism was
that we didn't do anything from 1980 onwards. That was not true because the fees set in 1978 were not completely phased in until 1983. In other words, if we were to start to revise fees, the
earliest we could start was in September '83 and not earlier. You
see, that was my point.
MR CHEONG:
The way I read it, I am sorry Mr Chairman 34 is there is no implied criticism whatsoever. It is just a statement
of fact.
13?
32
ist
33
That
19