- 2 -
FS: Well, the newspapers may be faster than we are but we would rather like to read the report and study it before we make any sort of considered view. But I would take up one point and that is the famous, or infamous, Gini coefficient which has come up in LegCo over the last few years, and every time it has come up we have pointed out that it is a fairly misleading measure. It is the one which is mainly quoted to show that the ratio is changing adversely for the poorer. It ignores indirect, non-dollar benefits. I take, for example, subsidised housing. It ignores taxation. So, in looking at the relative well-being of the rich and the poor, it seems a rather strange measure if you ignore subsidised housing and salaries tax, just to take two examples. So it is pretty crude, it is pretty narrow. But I would like to read that report and see exactly what it says and what it is based on. I am not at all against research which takes a serious look at how well we are doing in relation, particularly, to dealing with the poorer members of Hong Kong's community. That is a worthwhile aim. Let's just see whether the headlines are actually justified.
1
Question: If the study shows that it is true that the poor are getting poorer, what can the government do to narrow that gap?
FS: It doesn't, of course, say that and no one must ever summarise it in that way. People are getting better off. The argument is whether the richer ones are getting better off faster than the poorer ones. But no one is saying that the poorer ones are getting worse off. At least I don't think they are. I would be very surprised if they were. If they are, then they are basing it on something funny like the Gini coefficient.
Question: You said earlier that the banking system was the cornerstone of Hong Kong's economy. Earlier today ... a report that said that they think that the banking industry is poised for a downturn and the worst time... increased competition. And they believe that there is a possibility of speculation on the territory's currency. I know you have already dispelled that rumour. I don't know, this is one in a series of reports that have a negative outlook to the banks here.
FS: Well, I think you have to distinguish a bit. There is quite a lot of theorising over whether bank profits are going to be a bit slimmer. And that is, again, perfectly legitimate. Maybe they are going to be a bit slimmer. But that certainly does not mean that the banking sector is not healthy. We have very good banking supervision. We have a very good system under the Monetary Authority and I am still very happy that what I have said is still true, that a healthy banking system is a cornerstone of our economy. And we have got one, I am very happy to say.
Question: Well, it's just that they said again that the peg is vulnerable to speculation. I mean speculation is different to... the peg. Do you think that it is vulnerable to speculation?