WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 7, ...
12
COMMODITIES BILL NOT A PANACEA FOR DIFFICULTIES'
******
;
THE COMMODITIES TRADING (AMENDMENT) BILL 1985 IS NOT A PANAL FOR THE DIFFICULTIES LYING AHEAD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMODIT TRADING IN HONG KONG, THE HON CHEUNG YAN-LUNG SAID IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY (WEDNESDAY).
SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL DURING ITS RESUMED DEBAT: MR CHEUNG SAID THE AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED WOULD REVITALISE THE CAPABILITY OF THE COMPENSATION FUND TO SETTLE IN A MORE DYNAMIC AND RESOURCEFUL MANNER ANY CLAIMS OF LOSS BY INVESTORS SUSTAINE: THROUGH THE DEFAULT OF MEMBERS OF THE EXCHANGE COMPANY.
+THE NECESSITY FOR SUCH AN AMENDMENT IS OBVIOUS ESPECIALLY WHEN THE CLAIMS LODGED AGAINST THE FUND OVERWHELMED ITS ABILITY TO ACT AS A SAFETY VALVE IN THE PROTECTION OF INVESTORS, HE SAID.
THUS, THE GOVERNMENT'S IMMEDIATE REVIEW OF THE SITUATION AND THE SUBSEQUENT RECOMMENDATIONS TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM AS EMBOTA IN THE AMENDMENT BILL SHOULD BE WELCOMED AS A MEASURE TO RESTORE ORDER IN THE DISTURBED COMMODITY TRADING MARKET AND TO INVITE RENEWED CONFIDENCE IN COMMODITIES TRADING FROM DEALERS AND INVESTORS, BOTH LOCAL AND OVERSEAS.
THE REORGANISATION OF THE COMPENSATION FUND WAS A MOVE TOWA : THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
+ I FIND THE INTENTION OF THE BILL RESPECTABLE,+ MR CHEUNG SAID.
+HOWEVER, THE PROVISIONS AS SUCH SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEA AND FOR THAT MATTER SHOULD NOT CREATE A WRONG EXPECTATION TO THE EFFECT THAT, IT IS A PANACEA TO THE DIFFICULTIES LYING AHEAD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMODITIES TRADING IN HONG KONG.+
CONFIDENCE OF INVESTORS IN COMMODITIES TRADING WAS MAINTAINED THROUGH A NUMBER OF FACTORS SUCH AS THE CREDIBILITY AND GOOD WAYE OF DEALERS, THE PROFIT OPPORTUNITY, THE COMPARATIVE RISK WITH RESPECT TO OTHER FORMS OF INVESTMENT AND THE SELF-DISCIPLINE OF THOSE INVOLVED.
THE LEAST FACTOR AN INVESTOR WOULD CONSIDER WAS THE AVAILABILITY OF A COMPENSATION FUND, ESPECIALLY WHEN SUCH COMPENSATION COULD VERY WELL BE ONLY A PORTION OF HIS CLAIM.
+HENCE, BEFORE THIS COMPENSATION FUND HAS PROVED ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE WELL-BEING OF DEALERS, THE BURDEN IT CAUSES TO SHAREHOLDERS IS ALREADY FELT, ALTHOUGH I DO NOT DISAGREE THAT THE LESS RISK THE BETTER, HE SAID.
+IN VIEW OF THIS, I DO BEAR AN ARGUMENT THAT ALL SHAREHOLDER: ARE PENALISED FOR STAYING IN BUSINESS BY BEING FORCED TO TAKE UP THE RISK THAT THE IR PAID UP DEPOSIT OF $50 000, WITH A FURTHER DEPOSIT OR DEPOSITS UP TO $50 000 WHEN CALLED UP BY THE COMMISSI01., MAY BE DISPERSED IN CURING WOUNDS CAUSED BY DEFAULTED DEALERS.
1
/+NOTWITHSTANDING