3
lc 4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
c. 19
20
21
22
23
The
Sir, just in case you are forming the impression that I would like to spend and spend, there is at least one area in which I feel further additional expenditure should not be allowed.
This is the
expenditure on Vietnamese Refugees. SeHMEN'S Secretary for Security, when answering Mr. Sehems question in the Special Finance Committee Meeting last month, indicated
that he did
he did not know the share paid by the United Nations Higher Commissioner for Refugees Office in other countries of asylum as compared to the UNHCR's share in Hong Kong. But he
share paid by each thought the
each country depended
their
ability to pay. Hong Kong is a prosperous place. Does it follow that we have been paying more in the past and are expected to continue doing so, or paying even more, in the future?
Surely, this is unfair. Hong Kong people want a fair 9 deal, and indeed deserve a fair deal after
spending nearly $1 billion on this. G
on
The Administration should no longer seek to use taxpayers' money to improve the living/conditions of Vietnamese Refugees. They should be asking those who urge for improved facilities for the Vietnamese to put money where their mouths are. UNHCR
which is well
well supported by international funds, including contributions from the United States and the United Kingdom, should be able to do much more in financial terms. I strongly 25 suggest that the Administration negotiates a better deal with
UNHCR, and be more persistent and firm in their persuasion. In this, the Administration can be assured of the full backing
of Hong Kong people.
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
* * * 7 *22*** m
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
32
MI Desmond LEE
33
34
Mr. Desmond LEE (in
Cantonese); Sir, some<
35
<time ago, I quoted from a Sung poem:
36
の
?