voluntary rather than compulsory. Editorially, the Morning Post condemned the idea of a compulsory central provident fund while the Standard advocated encouragement of private funds. The Chinese press in general
in general has expressed cautious support for a compulsory provident fund scheme but considers that this should be on a decentralised rather than centralised basis.
12
A delegation of trade union leaders, including members of the Legislative Council and of the employee side of the Labour Advisory Board, called on the Secretary for Education and Manpower on 26 February. The delegation restated the known views of labour and social welfare groups on the desirability of a compulsory provident fund scheme and urged the early appointment of a commission, with employer and employee representation, on the lines proposed by the Labour Advisory Board.
Conclusions
13
The following broad conclusions can be drawn from the consultation and from other proposals and comments received:
the generally is
for
(a) The basic concern expressed by members of SWAC and the LAB and by social welfare and labour
need groups improved provision for old age, particularly in view of the ageing population structure and changing social values. The assumption here, which requires further investigation, is that families will in future be less willing or less able to
support ageing relatives (One fundamental issue
which may need to be considered in this context is whether old people should be enabled to support themselves without having to depend on their families or whether the latter should be expected to assist to the extent that they are able. The Public Assistance scheme assumes that families have а responsibility for the welfare of their members).
(b)
kind is
A provident fund mechanism of some kind favoured by employee representatives because part of the cost of contribution is met by the employer. Employers, on the other hand, take the view that the problem involves old people rather than old workers as such and that there is no reason why the burden should be
be laid upon employers rather than society generally.