6
THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1993
FS:
WE
WELL YOU'RE
RIGHT,
EXACTLY
RIGHT
THE IN ΤΟ BE THE FINANCING BUT WHICH
SAY IT
ABOVE THE
FIRST PART THAT THE FIGURES WE'VE USED OF NECESSITY HAD FIGURES
STARTED WITH. THAT'S TO
THE SAY
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. THE REVISED FINANCING PROPOSAL WHICH WE PUT UP
ΤΟ THAT'S WAS NOT AGREED WAS IN A SENSE SELF-CONTAINED. ENVISAGED THAT THE REVENUE FROM THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTS
BE AIRPORT RAILWAY WOULD BE REGARDED AS, TREATED AS AND WOULD IN FACT
MORE ADDITIONAL LAND
INJECT REVENUE AND THAT THAT WOULD BE USED TO
IT USED EXTRA MONEY INTO THE TWO PROJECTS, SO IT WAS SELF-CONTAINED. REVENUE TO PRODUCE EXTRA INJECTION, SO ON THAT BASIS YOU'D SIMPLY
IN AN ADDITIONAL FIGURE IN REVENUE AND AN ADDITIONAL FIGURE INJECTIONS OR SIMILAR AND THE NET RESULT WOULD BE THE SAME. OUR PROPOSAL. WHAT THE EVENTUAL OUTCOME WILL BE, OF COURSE WE KNOW.
GET EQUITY
THAT WAS DON'T
QUESTION:
IS
(INAUDIBLE) BECAUSE THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT
THAN ASKING FOR MORE CAPITAL INJECTIONS INTO THE TWO PROJECTS, OTHER
THAT YOU HAVE UNDERTAKEN. SO THERE THE 20 BILLION
IS STILL A HIGHER AND THAT POSSIBILITY THAT THE LEVEL OF DEFICITS WILL BE EVEN BY 1997/98 YOU CAN'T COME BACK WITH SURPLUS OR BALANCED BUDGET.
FS:
TOGETHER. EVEN THE TWO DON'T GO
IF YOU THINK OF
WHERE YOU MIGHT SCENARIOS
SPEND A BIT MORE OVER A PERIOD OF THREE OR FOUR YEARS, THAT WOULD OF COURSE REDUCE THE RESERVES AT THE END OF THE PERIOD BUT IT WOULDN'T MAKE IT ANYMORE DIFFICULT TO PRODUCE A BALANCED BUDGET IN 97/98 BECAUSE THOSE INJECTIONS WOULD BE BY 1997.
FINISHED
QUESTION:
ACCEPT DO YOU
THE CHINESE
THAT YOUR BUDGET FOR DEFICIT IS ALREADY IN BREACH
GOVERNMENT'S
CRITICISM
OF THE BASIC LAW?
FS: AS
AS
CLEARLY DIRECTLY
HAPPEN CAN'T
STRIVE
WITH
I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'VE SAID IT QUITE ᎢᎻᎪᎢ .
I'D BUT
JUST MAKE A
NOT FEW POINTS
DOESN'T FIRST OF ALL THE BASIC LAW RESPONDING TO THAT POINT. ΤΟ BE IN OPERATION YET. SECONDLY, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY SAY YOU HAVE DEFICITS. IT SAYS A NUMBER OF THINGS, IT SAYS YOU SHOULD
IN FOR
LINE BUDGETS, BALANCED
KEEPING GROWTH OF EXPENDITURE GROWTH OF THE ECONOMY AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. THIRDLY, AN OVER-LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THAT RULE WOULD LEAD TO THE ABSURD RESULT THAT COULD NEVER DRAW ON YOUR RESERVES. YOU WOULD SIMPLY ACCUMULATE LARGER ONLY AND LARGER RESERVES AND YOU COULD NEVER DRAW ON THEM BECAUSE THE
A WAY YOU CAN DRAW ON THEM IS TO RUN A DEFICIT, THAT'S WHY I SAY IT'S FUNNY SORT OF DEFICIT. SO I THINK IF ANYONE DID SAY THAT, IT WOULD BR RATHER STRANGE.
YOU
/THE EXCHANGE