WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1992
THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE. IF I HAD SAID IN MY SPEECH TODAY, AND WHEN IT COMES TO 1995, I AM NOT GOING TO TELL ANY OF YOU WHAT MY THOUGHTS ARE,
I AM GOING TO GO TO PEKING A FEW TIMES AND THEN WHEN WE'VE REACHED AN AGREEMENT I AM GOING TO COME BACK AND TELL YOU WHAT WE'VE DECIDED. IF I'D SAID THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY DE- STABILISING POLITICALLY, THE NEXT MONTH WOULD HAVE BEEN FULL OF RUMOUR MUCH OF IT UNFOUNDED ABOUT THIS OR THAT THING WHICH CHINA OR BRITAIN WAS GOING TO DO SO I THINK IT IS BETTER FOR ME TO SAY WHAT MY PROPOSALS ARE. I REPEAT, THEY ARE PROPOSALS. THEY ARE PROPOSALS то BE DISCUSSED HERE IN HONG KONG, THEY ARE PROPOSALS TO BE DISCUSSED IN PEKING. PROPOSALS TO BE DISCUSSED. AND I THINK IT IS BETTER AND SEEING THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IMMENSELY IMPORTANT MATTERS TO DO IT IN A SPIRIT OF FRANKNESS, IN A SPIRIT OF OPENNESS, SO PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING AND WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. SO I VERY MUCH HOPE THAT CHINESE OFFICIALS WON'T FEEL TOO STRONGLY, AS YOU SUGGESTED, BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE GOOD ARGUMENTS WHICH I HAVE TRIED TO PUT TO YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE.
FANNY WONG (SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST): DO YOU AGREE THAT YOUR SPEECH IS SO DESIGNED THAT IT WILL AMOUNT TO A CHALLENGE TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN UP TWO KEY AREAS WHICH ARE LIKELY TO UPSET CHINA; NAMELY, THAT YOU ARE SPEEDING UP DEMOCRACY IN SUCH AN UNPRECEDENTED MANNER AND THEN YOU ARE SPENDING SO EXPENSIVELY ON VARIOUS SOCIAL POLICIES WHICH IS LIKELY TO INCREASE THE FINANCIAL BURDEN ON THE SAR GOVERNMENT?
GOVERNOR: LET ME DEAL WITH THE LAST POINT FIRST. WE ARE ABLE TO MAKE CONSIDERABLE PROGRESS IN FIELDS LIKE SOCIAL WELFARE ABOVE ALL BECAUSE, THANKS TO THEIR OWN EFFORTS THIS YEAR, THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG HAVE EARNED A WINDFALL. WHEN WE STARTED OUT, AS YOU WILL RECALL, WE WERE PREDICTING A BUDGET SURPLUS FOR THIS YEAR OF ABOUT 7-1/2 BILLION HONG KONG DOLLARS. BECAUSE OUR REVENUES HAVE CONTINUED TO BE AS BUOYANT DURING THIS FINANCIAL YEAR AS THEY WERE IN THE LAST QUARTER OF THE LAST FINANCIAL YEAR, AND FOR ONE OR TWO OTHER REASONS, OUR SURPLUS WAS GOING TO OVERSHOOT THIS YEAR BY A FURTHER 6 BILLION. IT SEEMED TO ME THAT IT WOULD HAVE NOT MADE GREAT SENSE TO HAVE A CUSHION AS SUBSTANTIAL AS 13-1/2 BILLION BUT IT WOULD NOT BE SENSIBLE TO FRITTER AWAY THE 6 BILLION, BUT THE SENSIBLE THING TO DO WAS, AS IT WERE, TO CAPITALISE THE 6 BILLION. PUTTING IT THROUGH THE LOTTERIES FUND AND INTO, AND MAINLY, INTO OUR PROPOSALS ON SEWAGE SO THAT IT WENT TO MEET OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS SOME OF OUR LONGER TERM TARGETS: I THINK THAT IS A WHOLLY PRUDENT AND SENSIBLE WAY OF US BEHAVING. WE WILL STILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE WITH A VERY SUBSTANTIAL SURPLUS AND WE WILL LEAVE IN 1997 A VERY SUBSTANTIAL SURPLUS. AS I RECALL, LAST YEAR WE WERE BEING CRITICISED BECAUSE WE ANNOUNCED THE SURPLUS FOR 1997 WAS GOING TO BE MUCH GREATER THAN WE PREVIOUSLY PREDICTED. THE SURPLUS IN 1997 WILL STILL BE VERY LARGE. IT WILL BE A TRIBUTE TO THE VERY SENSIBLE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF THIS COMMUNITY'S AFFAIRS AND TO THE HARD WORK OF PEOPLE IN HONG KONG. IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD, THERE AREN'T, FRANKLY, MANY FINANCE MINISTERS ANYWHERE WHO CAN POINT TO THE SORT OF SURPLUSES THAT WE RUN IN HONG KONG AND THAT IS HOW IT IS GOING TO STAY. OUR PUBLIC EXPENDITURE PROGRAMMES WILL CONTINUE TO GROW LESS FAST THAN THE RISE IN OVERALL GROWTH IN THE ECONOMY.
/AS TO
+