Page 140 of 185
270
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
A working party specialized in the management and control of hawkers has been set up under the Secretary for Municipal Services. It is hoped that there will soon be an effective law-enforcing procedure to permit active involvement of the police so as to step up hawker control.
Second talk about Central Provident Fund
I read the following news on 24 December last year: '90-odd "amahs" went to petition bank headquarters after being dismissed without getting any pension'. It then reminded me that in October 1987, the 'Governor' remarked in his address to the Legco that the government has decided that it would not set up a Central Provident Fund or to make private provident funds compulsory. The main reason on which the government based in turning down the proposal of setting up a Central Provident Fund is that such a programme cannot provide assistance to people with the most urgent needs. These people include those who have neither any stable job nor income, as well as the aged labourers. The Governor believes that Central Provident Fund can be replaced by increasing the rate of Public Assistance and Old Age Allowance, and by extending the Long Service Payment Scheme. As a member of the labour force, I, however, clearly understand that Central Provident Fund, Public Assistance, Old Age Allowance and Long Service Payment Scheme are of totally different nature: Old Age Allowance is known as the 'fruit money'; Public Assistance is designed for the needy while Long Service Payment Scheme is to protect old labourers from unreasonable dismissal.
Central Provident Fund is not a kind of social welfare. It is not designed for the needy, but a contributory scheme aimed at providing all wage earners who earn their income from a stable job with a kind of guarantee after their retirement. Such a scheme can be accomplished only through monthly contribution from both employers and employees. The guarantee of the elderly's retired life has become a matter of great concern during recent years when the local population is gradually aging with a greater number of retired persons. Assistance to old labourers with no stable income is the urgent problem which the government should look into and solve at the moment. It is necessary to adopt the policies of Old Age Allowance or Long Services Payment Scheme to meet the urgent needs. Doing so, maybe the basic livelihood problem of the retired can be solved before 1997. For the long term benefit of our society, however, a compulsory Provident Fund System should be set up now. Instead of focusing on the effect to be obtained in three or five years' time, Provident Fund is a long term programme which aims at gradually improving the society besides providing an additional social welfare. In view of the influence the aging population will bring on the financial status of the government (the number of people aged over 75 will stand at 60 thousand odd in ten years' time), solution of the problem of the aging population by ways of Public Assistance and Old Age Allowance would result in heavy economic burden on the future SAR government.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 140 of 185
271
I think that Public Assistance, which is a kind of social welfare, is totally different from Central Provident Fund, and the kind of protection Long Service Payment Scheme offers to old labourers is far from that offered by Central Provident Fund. At present, the local economy is in good conditions. If we do not implement the Provident Fund Programme at this time, we will be missing a good chance to do so later. Facts will show the reluctance of the government in office to take up the responsibility as well as the restraints it suffers from various directions on this issue.
Although the government has recently submitted to the committee concerned a document explaining why it turned down the Central Provident Fund Programme, the reasons it based on are still considered contradictory, farfetched and not persuasive. It makes one feel disappointed towards the government and think that it is shirking its duties deliberately.
I hope very much that the government would reconsider the importance of the influence Central Provident Fund would impose on wage earners, that it would not give up such a perfect long term system or neglect the serious problem of the aging population, but let the public know that they have still got a far-sighted government during the interim period.
I support the motion.
DR. RONALD D. B. LEUNG (in English):-Mr. Chairman, the topic of my speech is on sponsorship of arts and sports by tobacco industry.
A. GENERAL BACKGROUND
The Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health was statutorily formed since October last year by the government. Its function is to coordinate all anti-smoking activities in Hong Kong and to serve as consultant and advisor to Hong Kong Government and other relevant bodies in Hong Kong and overseas.
The formation of COSH was the summation of all the efforts of Hong Kong Government over the past six years in its firm and steady stance in curtailing the promotion and use of tobacco in view of the health dangers related to its use. World Health Organization indicated in May 1986 that by the year 2000 tobacco use in all its form will not be compatible with the attainment of health. Cigarette smoking is the most single important factor and yet the most easily preventable cause of premature mortality and morbidity among adults in the world. According to government estimates, smoking kills 3,000 people annually, dwarfing deaths from other drug and alcohol abuse, road accident or any other consumer products on the market.
In addition, in countries attempting responsible governmental action to contain the tobacco epidemic, promotion of tobacco undermines the effectiveness of serious health messages; In view of the unparalleled dangers of smoking,
Page 140
Page 141