1988

Page 158 of 182

HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL

307

The Committee's recommendations, approved by the Legislative Council yesterday, meant a supplementary increase backdating to 1 April 1988. This resulted in the annual increase to range from 9.56% to 9.93%.(1) In other words, the Government has now decided to revise upwards its earlier pay award by an unprecedented 13%, 36% and 46% on its three Pay Bands!(2)

In so doing, the Government has effectively swept aside the PTS results painstakingly compiled by its Pay Investigation Unit. As a matter of fact, the PTS results and, more importantly, the methodology are long regarded as unreliable by both the civil service unions and the private sector employers who provide the data. However, the Government has stubbornly adhered to them until now.

Possibly it has only now seen fit to recognize that the survey methodology is deficient and thus the results produced are flawed.

This unsatisfactory state of affairs cannot continue and a long-term solution must be found. I once again urge the Government to engage independent remuneration consultants to review the existing PTS methodology and make changes where necessary.

Civil Service Pay Level

This brings me to a related issue concerning the appropriate pay level for the civil service. Some of us will recall that in 1986, the Government commissioned the Hay Consultants to conduct a Pay Level Survey. The results of this survey clearly indicate that if one takes into account the total pay and fringe benefits, the public sector is substantially ahead of the private sector for similar jobs.

These findings were accepted by the Government in 1987. However, despite earlier public undertaking that appropriate adjustments would be made, nothing has been done so far!

Now the same independent Committee of Inquiry has been asked to review the Hay Report. I believe the Committee will begin its work this year—almost 2 years after the findings have been accepted.

This is ridiculous. The issue has gone from Standing Commission to independent Consultants and now to another Committee of Inquiry. It really begs the question of whether the Government is serious and committed to act according to professional findings or is it merely adopting tactics so as to sweep the issue under the carpet? To me, this seems to demonstrate the lack of political willpower on the Government's part to act on the right answers.

Footnotes:

(1) In addition to this annual April salary adjustment, civil servants who are not at the top of the scale receive another incremental increase of approximately 5% on their anniversary date of their joining the civil services.

(2) Non-directorate civil service salaries in the Master Pay Scale is divided into three bands. The upper band covers monthly salaries from $16,000 to $30,000, the middle band from $5,000 to $15,999 and the lower band not exceeding $5,000.

Inflation Another worrying aspect of civil service pay increases and pay levels is the inflationary impact on our economy.

Current inflation seems to be partly caused by rapid rising wages. A major factor in the wage spiral is labour shortage, about which the Government seems content to be doing little at present, apart from wishing for a slowdown in the economy so that the problem will disappear. (At the very least, the Government should study actions which can be taken to relieve the acute labour shortage situation.)

Doing nothing is one thing, however, fueling inflation is another. As the largest employer in Hong Kong with more than 180,000 employees, the Hong Kong Government plays a significant role in setting the territory's wage level in general. Contrary to its policy, it is now leading, rather than following, the private sector in its pay increases.

The Government should be aware that by bowing to pressures from civil servants in awarding more than justified salaries, it may start a vicious cycle which neither it, nor the public, can afford.

Environmental Pollution

Like many of my colleagues in this debate, I would like to touch on the subject of environmental pollution. Like inflation, environmental pollution is one of the vital issues facing Hong Kong today. Unless properly and quickly gripped, it will cause irreparable damage to our long-term health and prosperity.

Though the environmental pollution problem as a whole is beyond the jurisdiction of this Council, it has a direct impact on our facilities such as the beaches and activities such as the Clean Hong Kong Campaign.

Whilst I welcome the Governor's stated intention that about $12 billion will be spent on our sewage system in the next 10 years, I question whether the Administration is committed to spending this amount.

If the Government is genuine, it needs to make a firm commitment. The Government should announce an action plan with a timetable, according to which this $12 billion on our sewage system will be spent. There is also the question of whether the existing Civil Service machinery will be able to implement such an ambitious project. Should the Government not consider the establishment of a more dynamic Corporation to implement this instead?

Financial resources apart, the Government can surely speed up much-needed legislative amendments to provide more 'teeth' to the environmental watchdogs.

Let me cite two examples of where amendments to inadequate legislation are badly required.

Page 158 of 182