2 -
But cash assistance is not the only or the most important help a Government can give. Nobody wants to live off charity. What is more important to everyone, as is also reflected in the amendment proposed by the Hon Lee Cheuk-yan, is a home, a job, education for their children and care when they fall sick. Our progress in addressing these needs is a matter of public record. Social Security and welfare services provide the back-up when these front-line needs fail to be met. Social security is not a tool for ironing out inequalities; it is a safety net. And we try to give that net enough spring to encourage those who are able to bounce back into the mainstream and support themselves once more.
There are well documented risks associated with trying to hijack social security systems to achieve goals they are not designed to tackle. Such systems are not suitable as a substitute retirement protection scheme. Financial security in old age should be provided through contributory retirement schemes. Social security payments to those able to work should be adequate to support their needs if work is unavailable and this year we increased CSSA levels for this category of adult recipients by nearly 30%. In short, we cannot use cash payments to eliminate poverty as part of the Hon Lee Cheuk-yan's amendment seems to suggest.
My colleague, the Secretary for Financial Services has addressed the wider issues raised in this Motion and the amendment proposed to it. I have focussed on the issues relating to welfare and social security. This is a narrow focus concentrating on how we can alleviate the effects of low incomes and a lack of financial resources rather than how we can address the cause. The causes of a disparity of wealth in any society are deep-seated and complex. But no modern society is without a degree of disparity and those at the bottom end of the economic ladder will always be regarded by others as the poor. Even the wealthiest nations in the world still have some who will be characterised as 'poor'. I am sure our 'poor' would not necessarily be regarded as 'poor' in some other Asian settings.
In short, it is unrealistic to call for the elimination of poverty when poverty is clearly a relative concept. But there are few greater responsibilities for a Government than to alleviate the plight of those who are the least fortunate. And I believe that we and the non-governmental welfare sector are addressing our responsibilities very seriously in this regard. A message from this Council that it believes we are turning a blind eye to the plight of those in need is simply not helpful.
End