104
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
and the large office blocks, hotels, etc., in the centre of the city; but the poor people or the landlords paying in respect of poor people will definitely pay less.
The next point is the continuance of the two per cent. rates. On that I venture to suggest that all the criticisms that have been made are invalid because they assumed that the present rate is borne by the landlord. It may be paid in the first place, but I cannot believe that the rates are not in fact incorporated in the rent, and if the rates were reduced, in the course of time the rent would be adjusted and eventually the tenant pays and not the landlord. Therefore, the criticism that the landlord is being asked to bear the burden of the military contribution, etc., is not true. It is the general community, in its capacity as the occupier of a house or floor or part of the floor, which is paying that taxation.
Next, the Hon. Mr. Lo differed from me in my comment that the rates here are on the whole low. Well, possibly our standards differ. I come from England where a rate of 40 per cent. is regarded as extraordinarily low. I think it may be found that rates in Singapore are substantially higher than here, and in comparison of the proportion of the rates to the total taxation, I think it is forgotten that this Government is also a municipality and that no municipal taxes are paid. Indeed, I think the total rates paid in England are certainly not less than one-sixth of the aggregate revenue of the central and municipal governments, and in addition, of course, in England the owner or occupier of the property has to pay income-tax; so I don't think it can be seriously argued that the rates here are higher.
Finally, on this question of the two per cent. rates. It is suggested that it is immaterial whether the charge collected in that way is transferred to the water charges. As I said in my original memo, a transfer of that kind would be a transfer from the better-off class of the community to the poorer class and if the Hon. Mr. Lo's theory that the landlord bears the rate were conceded, it would be even more obvious that a transfer of that nature is wrong.
He took the
His next point was the estimates of revenue. figures of the first half of 1938, an exceptionally dry period and at a time when the population of the Colony was artificially swollen and when water consumption was abnormally high. I don't think, therefore, that it would be in the least prudent finance to frame and to govern the water charges on the basis of that exceptional period of six months. But in any case, the Hon, Mr. Lo ignored the fact that additional consumption meant additional expenses, and apart from the inevitable increase resulting from the actual increase of consumption there are higher costs for supplying of water this year, for example, in the increased cost of coal. Even in that half year, the increased expenditure would go a very long way to offset the increased revenue.
On the expenditure side, the principal criticism is as to the charge for renewals. Here, I think perhaps too much emphasis has been laid
20
Page 20Page 21
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.