Comprehensive Social Security Assistance
3
+
Next, Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA). The Secretary for Health and Welfare has described the impressive improvements we have made in the social welfare field in general and on CSSA in particular. As I said in my Budget Speech, we have increased our expenditure on welfare by 88 per cent in real terms over the past five years. The rate of increase in welfare spending in this Budget exceeds again by a wide margin the rates of increase allowed for all other major government spending programmes. This is a good track record. It shows that we have consistently put priority on caring for those in our community who need support. I am sure we will continue to do so, so long as this reflects the wish of our community.
In this debate, Members have focused on CSSA payments for the elderly. We agree that this is an important issue. We have listened carefully to the arguments put forward to increase the standard rate, and will weigh them up carefully in the 1997 RAE that will shape the 1998 Budget. Next month, my colleagues and I will start our consultation exercise on spending priorities. This will give the whole community the opportunity to make their views known and to look at all proposals, including those on CSSA for the elderly, together. The timing of the consultation and the two studies on the elderly mentioned by Secretary for Health and Welfare, to be completed this summer, fit together well. One study is on the financial position of elderly CSSA recipients. The other is on the needs of the elderly for services and support. So, our decisions will have a rational basis. So that a caring idea from the heart will be pursued and decided upon rationally in the head. We are listening and our minds are open.
Some Members have demanded an immediate increase of $300 per month. I would like to make two points in reply. First, while cash is clearly important, so too are the nursing homes, social support networks, day care centres, home help, and healthcare that we provide. There needs to be a balance between financial help and direct services. We gave priority to cash assistance in the 1996 Budget. It was entirely reasonable for us this time round to put the emphasis on direct services.
Second, we have to ask ourselves what is it that allows Hong Kong to increase government spending in real terms year after year when many other countries in the world are cutting back. The answer is we have a sensible system based on discipline. Because we keep our discipline, our system works. It continues to keep our economy growing, it continues to create the new wealth that allows us to spend more. Some Members have suggested that we could get round the system by setting up a specific fund to help the elderly. But such a capital fund should only be used for genuinely one-off items. If a fund is used instead for recurrent purposes, such as making regular cash payments, this circumvents our guidelines and smacks of creative accounting. No responsible Financial Secretary could agree to such a proposal. This would be a breach of discipline. Short term popularity would have been bought at the expense of long term prosperity. It is too high a price to pay.