- 2
THURSDAY, JULY 21, 1994
CAN I
ANOTHER
AM
AND
PERHAPS,
JUST ADD ONE OR TWO COMMENTS ABOUT SUBJECT WHICH IS CURRENTLY THE SUBJECT OF A GOOD DEAL OF DEBATE. I VERY PLEASED THAT WE ARE HAVING IN THE COMMUNITY. SUCH A VIGOROUS WIDE-RANGING DEBATE ABOUT OUR PROPOSALS TO TAKE SOME OF THE INSECURITY
AND AGE BY ESTABLISHING A DECENT OUT OF
TOTALLY OLD
FINANCIABLE THINK THE PENSION SCHEME. THE DEBATE IS NOW WELL AND TRULY ON AND I
WE DO. GOVERNMENT IS PLEASED BY THE SUPPORT THAT WE'VE BEEN GETTING.
HELP THE HAVE TO TAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT PENSIONS AND HOW TO
POPULATION ELDERLY. IN 1997, WE RECKON THAT ABOUT 11 PER CENT OF OUR
OVER THE WILL BE 65 OR OVER, SO IT'S 600,000 PEOPLE. WE RECKON THAT
WILL NEXT 40 YEARS, THE PROPORTION OF THE POPULATION WHICH IS OVER 65 MORE THAN DOUBLE FROM 10 TO 20 PER CENT. SO, THERE IS AN
OF PROVIDING MORE REQUIREMENT FOR US TO FACE UP TO THESE PROBLEMS
THE SCHEME WHICH GENEROUS AND COMPREHENSIVE HELP FOR THE ELDERLY. WE'VE PUT FORWARD AFTER A GREAT DEAL OF THOUGHTS AND DISCUSSIONS, I THINK, THE BEST OPTION THAT'S ADVANCED THOUGH WE'LL LOOK FORWARD HEARING ABOUT OTHER PROPOSALS,
UNLIKE A
THAN
YOU
IMPREGNABLE
IS.
ΤΟ
NOW
THE
ASSISTANCE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND, IT PROVIDES RATHER
HAVING TO WAIT FOR A
A CENTRAL GENERATION. UNLIKE
THE CASE PROVIDENT FUND, IT HELPS THOSE WHO ARE IN NEED WHICH ISN'T
CENTRAL PROVIDENT WITH A CPF. IT'S ALSO MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE THAN A
FROM KNOW, FUND. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CONTRIBUTIONS, AS EMPLOYERS AND THE EMPLOYEES OF ONE AND A HALF PERCENT WHICH IS CLEARLY MAKING WHOLLY AFFORDABLE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF AN ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION WHICH WILL AMOUNT TO ABOUT 30 PER CENT OF THE BILLION INTO COST OF THE SCHEME AND IN ADDITION, WE ARE PUTTING $10 THE SCHEME FOR A START SO THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE MEETING ABOUT 35 ON PER CENT OF THE COST. I DON'T THINK THAT THOSE WHO SAY THAT WE ARE THE SLIPPERY SLOPE TO A BANKRUPT WELFARE STATE, ARE TALKING SENSE.
ONE-AND-A-HALF ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE TOTAL SCHEME COSTING ABOUT
IN PAYMENT
DEVELOPED CENT PER
OF OUR GDP, TYPICALLY COUNTRIES, OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES WHERE THEIR COMPREHENSIVE WELFARE PROVISIONS REPRESENT ABOUT 10 TIMES AT ABOUT 15 PER CENT OF GDP.
TRANSFER
WE
PUTTING SAID EARLIER THAT I WAS GLAD THAT OTHER PEOPLE WERE
то FORWARD PROPOSALS AND NOT JUST CRITICISING AND, OBVIOUSLY, WE NEED
THE VERY CAREFULLY. PROPOSALS THOSE
GENERAL CHAMBER OF EXAMINE
FOR NOT HAVING A COMMERCE YESTERDAY PUT FORWARD THEIR PROPOSALS
THE BUT FOR INCREASING SCHEME
AMOUNT OF OLD COMPREHENSIVE
AGE AT THAT ALLOWANCES. I THINK IT'S OBVIOUSLY NECESSARY FOR US TO LOOK THAT CONSIDER
APPROACH PROPOSAL IN DETAIL. BUT WE DID, OF COURSE, OURSELVES BEFORE AND WE'LL BE KIDDING OURSELVES IF WE THOUGHT THAT WAS SOMEHOW
ASSESSMENT, A CHEAPER OR MORE AFFORDABLE OPTION. OUR INITIAL AND I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT IS NOT FINAL BECAUSE WE'LL WANT TO COST OF DO A THOROUGH STUDY, BUT OUR INITIAL ASSESSMENT IS THAT THE THE GENERAL CHAMBER'S SCHEME WOULD PUT AT LEAST TWO PER CENT NOT ON PROFIT TAX BUT ON SALARY TAX AS WELL. THERE ISN'T ANY SUCH THING AS A FREE-FOR-THE- FREE LUNCH AND THERE'S CERTAINLY NO SUCH THING AS TAXPAYER INCREASE IN OLD AGE ALLOWANCES. SO, OUR ASSESSMENT THE COSTS OF THAT SCHEME WOULD PUT, AND ARE HIGHER, ΟΝΤΟ BUSINESS AND ONTO EMPLOYEES AND I AM SURE THAT CAN'T THE INTENTION. I DON'T THINK IT'S WHAT PEOPLE WANT.
ONLY
IS THAT THE TAX BURDEN HAVE BEEN
/I WANT