XN000022-1992-10-08 — Page 19

18

I

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1992

GOVERNOR: POINT THAT OUTSET OF GOVERNMENT

IT IS NOT TO IN ANY WAY BELITTLE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE THE HONOURABLE MEMBER HAS MADE TO SAY THAT, WHEN AT THE OUR DISCUSSIONS I SAID THAT I DIDN'T THINK THAT THE WOULD BE REGARDED FOR LONG AS HAVING BEEN EXTRAVAGANT YESTERDAY I DIDN'T REALISE THAT THE CRITICISMS WOULD BEGIN QUITE AS RAPIDLY AS THEY HAVE. THE PROPOSALS THAT WE MAKE ON PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, BOTH THE INCREASE IN SCALE RATES, AND THE RELAXATION OF THE ABSENCE RULE, ARE SUBSTANTIAL STEPS FORWARD. SUBSTANTIAL STEPS FORWARD IN HONG KONG WHICH WILL, I THINK, BE VERY WIDELY WELCOMED. BUT I KNOW THAT THERE WILL ALWAYS BE THOSE WHO, I'M SURE FOR VERY GOOD REASON, WILL SAY YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE FURTHER, YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE. SOCIETIES CUSTOMARILY MAKE ADVANCES IN SOCIAL WELFARE BECAUSE THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO DEVELOP THAT SORT OF CASE VERY OFTEN WITH ELOQUENCE AND VERVE.

WHAT ONE HAS TO DO ALWAYS IS TO BALANCE DIFFERENT INTERESTS AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE GONE FURTHER THAN WE ANNOUNCED YESTERDAY WITHOUT RUNNING THE RISK OF THE SORT OF FINANCIAL IMPRUDENCE AGAINST WHICH I WAS EARLIER WARNED, OR WITHOUT CUTTING EXPENDITURE IN OTHER AREAS. FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR, AS I SAID YESTERDAY, THE NEW RATES PLUS RENT AND OTHER ADDITIONAL GRANTS WILL PROVIDE A MONTHLY INCOME OF $5,505. I WOULD WELCOME ANY COMPARISON THAT THE HONOURABLE MEMBER MADE WITH THE MEDIUM INCOME OF A WORKER IN MANUFACTURING AND HIS FAMILY. I THINK THAT COMPARISON WOULD SHOW PERHAPS THAT THE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE RATE INCREASES THAT I WAS SUGGESTING WERE PRETTY REASONABLE, BUT I REPEAT THAT IT IS INVARIABLY THE CASE THAT WHATEVER ADVANCE ONE MAKES IN SOCIAL PROGRAMMES, THERE WILL ALWAYS UNDERSTANDABLY BE THOSE WHO SAY THAT'S NOT ENOUGH, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A PROPER CONCERN FOR THE NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISADVANTAGED AND THE NEEDY.

MR

MARTIN LEE:

MR PRESIDENT AND/OR GOVERNOR. THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE NOT MENTIONED IT IN YOUR SPEECH YESTERDAY DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY WILL GO AWAY, WHETHER BY THE KAI TAK AIRPORT OR BY THE 'LADY MAURINE'. I AM REFERRING TO THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL. YOU KNOW THAT BOTH THE BAR ASSOCIATION HERE AND THE BAR COUNCIL OF ENGLAND AND WALES, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL HAVE EXPRESSED THE STRONG VIEW THAT WHAT HAS BEEN AGREED BETWEEN THE BRITISH AND CHINESE GOVERNMENTS OVER THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COURT OF FINAL APPEAL IN HONG KONG BEFORE 1997 DOES NOT, IS NOT, CONSISTENT WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION OR THE BASIC LAW. NOW, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT COURT? ARE YOU GOING TO WAIT UNTIL IT COMES BACK TO US VIA THE CHEK LAP KOK AIRPORT?

/GOVERNOR: WHAT