Line-to-take
20
We believe that
the
1987 decision on the Central Provident Fund remains valid and that no new factors have emerged which are sufficiently strong to alter the balance of the arguments. However, we recognise that care for the elderly would be likely to be a problem of increasing magnitude. While the Government is already taking action to meet the needs of the aged in various areas including social security, medical and health, housing and retirement benefits, the initiative is taken separately by different Policy Branches and Departments.
We propose that an inter-departmental working party should be established to ensure that the Government's policies and programmes in respect of the aged are effectively coordinated and that the problems facing the aged are looked at again as a whole. The working party should look into the various problems facing the aged with a view to recommending a way forward.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
21
We have not consulted any organisation.
FINANCIAL AND STAFFING IMPLICATIONS
22
There are no financial or staffing implications resulting from the recommendations in this memorandum. Any proposals with financial implications that may stem from the proposed inter-departmental working party will be examined in the usual way.
PUBLIC REACTION
23
The
or
Government's decision not to establish a Central Provident Fund
other compulsory schemes would be criticised by labour and social welfare groups. Employers and informed commentators would welcome the decision. The media would reflect these differing views which would influence public reaction in general. The decision to establish a working party to look at the problems facing the aged would be well received, although some may criticise the
side-stepping
Central Provident Fund
Government issue.
for
the
CONFIDENTIAL