XN000022-1992-10-08 — Page 28

27

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1992

AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS ON BASIC EDUCATION. MAYBE YOU HAVE COME TO HONG KONG ONLY FOR TWO MONTHS AND YOU ARE NOT VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE SITUATION IN HONG KONG. NORMALLY, EVERY CHILD IN HONG KONG WOULD HAVE TO STUDY TWO YEARS IN A KINDERGARTEN BEFORE THEY GO TO PRIMARY SCHOOL AND KINDERGARTEN FEES ARE VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE, BUT THERE IS NO MENTION OF SUBSIDY FOR THIS PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION, NOT IN THE EDUCATION COMMISSION'S NUMBER 5 REPORT AND NOT IN YOUR POLICY SPEECH. FRANKLY, I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED.

THE THIRD QUESTION IS THAT IN YOUR FIRST POLICY SPEECH YOU SEEM TO BE VERY GENEROUS. IN THE YEAR 1992 YOU SPEND $13.5 BILLION ON THE PEOPLE. MAY I ASK YOU WHETHER 1993 BUDGET WOULD YOU RAISE TAXES AND ADD MORE LEVIES ON THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG?

GOVERNOR:

PLAN TO IN YOUR ORDINARY

I

THE ANSWER TO YOUR THIRD QUESTION IS, NO. SAID YESTERDAY, VERY CLEARLY, THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE IN HONG KONG ΤΟ HAVE LOW AND PREDICTABLE TAXES. I THINK LOW TAXES IS ONE OF THE REASONS FOR OUR SUCCESS AND THAT IS WHY I AM KEEN THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE PRUDENT ABOUT PUBLIC SPENDING. WHAT I THINK ALL OF US RECOGNISE IS, IF YOU INCREASE PUBLIC SPENDING BY MORE THAN THE ECONOMY GROWS THEN THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN PAY FOR IT IS BY INCREASING TAXES AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO AVOID. THAT MEANS THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE DIFFICULT CHOICES OF PRIORITIES BETWEEN ONE PUBLIC SPENDING AREA AND ANOTHER AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO DO YESTERDAY.

SECONDLY

-

DOING YOUR QUESTIONS IN REVERSE ORDER I DID ANNOUNCE YESTERDAY THAT WE WOULD PAY FOR A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN NURSERY PLACES BETWEEN NOW AND 1997, AND I ALSO REFERRED IN PARAGRAPH 30 OF MY SPEECH I KNOW BECAUSE I JUST LOOKED IT UP - TO THE FEE-REMISSION SCHEME IN KINDERGARTENS, BUT IF YOU'VE GOT OTHER SPECIFIC PROPOSALS THAT YOU'D LIKE ME TO LOOK AT, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO SO.

ON YOUR FIRST QUESTION, I ENTIRELY AGREE WITH

YOU ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE MAXIMUM RE-TRAINING OF OUR LABOUR FORCE SO THAT WE CAN MEET NEW NEEDS AND SO THAT WE CAN AVOID A SITUATION IN WHICH SOME PEOPLE ARE MAROONED BY CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY OR BY ADVANCES IN THEIR OWN INDUSTRIES. I ANNOUNCED YESTERDAY A COMMITMENT OF $300 MILLION TO INCREASING THE NUMBER OF TRAINING PLACES BY 15,000. WE'VE JUST STARTED A RE-TRAINING SCHEME, WE'VE ALREADY GOT, I THINK, 6,000 PLACES IN IT. WHAT I'VE PROPOSED WILL MORE THAN DOUBLE WHERE WE STAND AT THE MOMENT AND I VERY MUCH HOPE THAT EMPLOYERS WILL USE THOSE THAT ARE RE-TRAINED AT CONSIDERABLE COST BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN ENORMOUS CONTRIBUTION TO MAKE TO OUR ECONOMY IT BECOMES MORE SOPHISTICATED AND AS IT BECOMES MORE HIGH TECHNOLOGY.

THE LADY NEAR NUMBER THREE. CAN I SUGGEST THAT IF PEOPLE CONCEIVABLY RESTRICT THEIR QUESTIONS TO ONE, IT WILL ENABLE, IF ASK THREE QUESTIONS, THREE TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE TO GET IN.

AS

CAN THEY

NUMBER FIVE, SINCE YOU'VE BEEN SO VIGOROUS, THE CHAP AT NUMBER FOUR. BUT NUMBER THREE.

YOU CAN HAVE A

GO

AFTER

/QUESTION: MR