WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1993
NO,
MR PRESIDENT, I DO NOT WANT AN EASY WAY OUT. IT IS TIME THAT WE PREPARED A CLEARER STATEMENT OF OUR INDUSTRIAL SUPPORT PROGRAMMES AND HOW THESE SHOULD BE DEVELOPED. THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY HAS ALREADY GIVEN AN INDICATION IN HIS BUDGET SPEECH THIS YEAR THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THE INDUSTRY SUPPORT PROGRAMME. THIS IS ON TOP OF SUBSTANTIAL SUMS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED : $200M FOR THE APPLIED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FUND WHICH WENT INTO OPERATION IN MARCH THIS YEAR ACCIDENTALLY. $300M TO ADD ΤΟ THE EMPLOYEE RETRAINING FUND; AND ABOUT $60M A YEAR EXTRA IN RESEARCH FUNDING FOR TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS BY 1994/95. MR HENRY TANG REFERRED TO THE $200 MILLION WE HAVE ALLOCATED FOR APPLIED R&D AS PEANUTS. IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO FIND OUT WHAT AMOUNT ME TANG WOULD NOT REGARD AS PEANUTS. SPEECHES IN THIS COUNCIL ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS HAVE REFERRED TO THE OTHER LITTLE DRAGONS SPENDING BETWEEN ONE TO TWO PER CENT OF THEIR RESPECTIVE GDP ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND SUGGESTED THAT HONG KONG SHOULD FOLLOW SUIT. TRANSLATED INTO HONG KONG FIGURES, ONE PER CENT OF OUR GDP WILL AMOUNT TO HK$7.4 BILLION. AND TWO PER CENT WOULD BE EQUAL TO ALMOST HK$15 BILLION. THESE ARE ASTRONOMICAL SUMS, ESPECIALLY WHEN COMPARE WITH REVENUE FROM PROFITS TAX IN 1992 OF ONLY $32 BILLION. WHERE IS THE MONEY SUPPOSE TO COME FROM? AN INCREASE IN CORPORATE PROFITS TAX? I THINK NOT, THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY WOULD SURELY OBJECT AS WILL AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF OUR BUSINESSMEN AND INDUSTRIALISTS. GOING BACK TO THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR INDUSTRIAL SUPPORT, I CAN SAY THAT THIS NEW FUNDING WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL ALTHOUGH RIGHT NOW I AM NOT IN A POSITION TO REVIEW HOW MUCH IT WILL AMOUNT TO.
I CAN ALSO SAY THAT IT WILL COME OUT OF GENERAL REVENUE, NOT OUT OF ANY LEVY ON TRADE AND INDUSTRY, CERTAINLY NOT OUT OF THE LEVY ON RE- EXPORTS MENTIONED BY MR HENRY TANG JUST NOW. WE NEED TO HAVE A FRAMEWORK FOR EMPLOYING THIS NEW FUNDING TO BEST EFFECT. I INTEND ΤΟ WORK WITH ITDC TO DEVELOP THIS FRAMEWORK, AND I LOOK FORWARD ΤΟ SHARING IT WITH YOU.
RR
RUT.
ANY FRAMEWORK, ANY STATEMENT OF HOW OUR INDUSTRY SUPPORT PROGRAMME SHOULD DEVELOP MUST BE FIRMLY GROUNDED IN REALITY. IT MUST SET IN POSITIVE TERMS, BUT THESE MUST BE TERMS THAT DO NOT COMMIT TAXPAYERS' MONEY TO THE PURSUIT OF WISHFUL IDEAS. NOR MUST WE BIND OURSELVES TO PROJECTS THAT APPEAR TO OFFER BENEFIT TODAY, BỤT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE LONG-TERM HEALTH OF THE ECONOMY.
ΤΟ
IN THIS RESPECT I AM SOMEWHAT TROUBLED BY SOME OF THE WORDING COMMON TO BOTH THE MOTION AND THE AMENDMENT. ROTH SPEAK OF A NEED "BROADEN" OUR INDUSTRIAL BASE, BUT IS BROADENING, WITH ITS IMPLICATION OF MAINTAINING THE OLD AS WELL AS DEVELOPING THE NEW, REALLY WHAT IS MEANT, OR REALLY WHAT IS POSSIBLE? WE HAVE TO RECOGNISE THAT MANUFACTURING WHICH DEPENDS ON LOW WAGE COSTS HAS LEFT HONG KONG AND WILL NOT RETURN. ONLY THOSE INDUSTRIES THAT CAN HARNESS CONTINUOUS QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT; THAT CAN UNITE WITH THE CAPABILITIES THAT HONG KONG HAS TO OFFER FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES, ONLY THESE INDUSTRIES WILL REMAIN VIABLE HERE.
זז
BOTH VERSIONS OF THE MOTION EXPRESS THE BELIEF THAT BY UP- DATING OUR POLICY, REVIEWING THE ROLE AND COMPOSITION OF THE ITDC, AND BY INCREASING ITS FUNDING, WE WILL "STRENGTHEN OUR INDUSTRIAL COMPETITIVENESS AND DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE THAT THESE ACTIONS WILL HELP, BUT WE ARE LEAVING OUT 90% OF THE PICTURE. HONG KONG'S INDUSTRIAL COMPETITIVENESS AND DEVELOPMENT IN FUTURE DEPENDS OVERWHELMINGLY ON THE ENERGY AND ENTERPRISE OF OUR ENTREPRENEURS, AS IT ALWAYS HAS IN THE PAST.
JUST
HONG KONG'S