14
Central compensation fund for employees
Following is a question by the Hon Cheng Yiu-tong and a reply by the Secretary for Education and Manpower, Mr Joseph W P Wong, in the Legislative Council today (Wednesday):
Question:
Will the Government inform this Council whether it has taken any follow-up action or conducted any feasibility study since the motion urging the Government to set up a central compensation fund for employees was carried in this Council on 3 November 1993 and, if so, what the details are?
Reply:
Mr President,
-
By way of background, let me first explain that the existing employees an individual liability system compensation system comprises two different systems underpinned by the Employees Compensation Ordinance, and a collective liability system underpinned by the Pneumoconiosis Compensation Ordinance (PCO) and the Occupational Deafness Compensation Ordinance (ODCO). These two systems serve different purposes.
Under the individual liability system, all employers are required to insure their liabilities for a specified minimum amount with authorised insurers in the private sector. By contrast, under the collective liability system, compensation is paid to a particular group of eligible claimants, out of a statutory levy imposed on employers of the building, construction & quarrying industries under the PCO and on employees' compensation insurance premium under the ODCO,
Turning to the question, the proposal to set up a central employees' compensation fund (central EC fund) was fully debated in this Council in a Motion Debate on 3 November 1993. During the debate, the then Secretary for Education and Manpower explained in great detail why it would not be appropriate to make a fundamental change to the existing system. I do not wish to repeat all the arguments as they have already become a matter of public record. But I would like to reiterate that we did not then and do not now see any justification for replacing the existing privately-run employees compensation insurance market by what would, in effect, be a central bureaucratic monopoly.