15
-
THURSDAY, MARCH 30, 1978
HE DISAGREED WITH THE LOGIC OF THE ARGUMENT THAT THE COROLLARY TO MAKING JUNIOR SECONDARY EDUCATION COMPULSORY IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR IS THE ABOLITION OF FEES.
+ IN MY LOGIC IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SAY THAT THE COROLLARY TO MAKING JUNIOR SECONDARY EDUCATION COMPULSORY IS THE REMISSION OF FEES IN WHOLE OR IN PART FOR THOSE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY IN WHOLE OR IN PART.+
HE SAID THE REASON FOR THE RICH TO PAY IS BASED ON A SOUND AND WIDELY ACCEPTED SOCIAL PRINCIPLE THAT THE PRIMARY RIGHT AND DUTY OF EDUCATION LIES WITH THE PARENTS, NOT WITH THE STATE, WHETHER THE EDUCATION IS LEGALLY COMPULSORY OR NOT.
HE SAW THE RIGHT AND DUTY OF PARENTS AS TWOFOLD: THEY SHOULD PROVIDE A SUITABLE LEVEL OF EDUCATION TO THEIR CHILDREN FOR THE IR CHILDREN'S OWN SAKE, AND FOR THE SAKE OF THE COMMUNITY. AN UNEDUCATED, OR AN INSUFFICIENTLY EDUCATED CHILD, BECOMES A LIABILITY ON THE COMMUNITY. THE PARENTS' OBLIGATION EXISTS QUITE INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY STATE COMPULSION.
THIS, HE SAID, IS WELL UNDERSTOOD IN HONG KONG, WHERE PARENTS MAKE TREMENDOUS SACRIFICES TO EDUCATE THE IR CHILDREN. +PARENTS IN HONG KONG ALSO HAVE SELF RESPECT, AND IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION WOULD WELCOME A SYSTEM OF REMISSION OF FEES, READJUSTED IF NECESSARY TO COVER MORE PEOPLE, RATHER THAN A FREE HAND-OUT SYSTEM. +
HE ADDED: +WHEN PARENTS GIVE UP THE IR OBLIGATIONS TOWARDS THE EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN THEY IN FACT TEND ALSO TO LOSE THEIR RIGHTS, WITH CONSEQUENCES TOO PAINFULLY VISIBLE TO NEED COMMENT.+
THIS BROADER SOCIAL IMPLICATION, HE SAID, HAS HAPPENED ELSEWHERE IN MODERN SOCIETY. IT COULD HAPPEN IN HONG KONG.
TAXATION SYSTEM UNFAIR TO MIDDLE INCOME GROUP
*******
WONG LAM
THE PRESENT TAXATION SYSTEM IS UNFAIR TO THE MIDDLE INCOME CLASS WHO EARN ABOUT $25,000 TO $70,000 PER ANNUM, UNOFFICIAL LEGISLATIVE COUNCILLOR, THE HON. WONG LAN SAID TODAY.
SPEAKING AT THE RESUMED BUDGET DEBATE, MR. WONG SAID IN RELATION TO THE IR INCOME, THE PERCENTAGE WHICH THE MIDDLE INCOME CLASS PAID AS TAX WAS USUALLY HIGHER THAN OTHER CLASSES OF TAXPAYERS.
HE SAID WHILE THE MIDDLE CLASS HAD TO PAY TAX AT A PERCENTAGE ALMOST EQUIVALENT TO OR IN SOME CASES HIGHER THAN THAT PAID BY THE WEALTHY, THEY DID NOT ENJOY AS MANY FORMS OF SOCIAL WELFARE SERVICES, INCLUDING PUBLIC HOUSING, AS PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO THE LOWER INCOME GROUP.
/NR. JONG