XN000022-1993-03-03 — Page 65

39

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 1993

YOU

TAX- HAVE

QUESTION:

JUST TO FOLLOW UP. BY BUDGETING FOR A DEFICIT, DO YOU SAID THAT, IS IT YOUR INTENTION TO ACHIEVE THE EFFECT THAT CAN ACTUALLY CLOSE THE DOOR FOR LEGCO MEMBERS TO ASK FOR FURTHER YOU AND FURTHER SPENDING ON OTHER, SAY, ITEMS THAT CONCESSIONS NOT INCLUDED IN YOUR BUDGET SPEECH? BECAUSE NORMALLY, YOU WILL UP WITH A BIGGER THAN EXCESSIVE SURPLUS, SO BY HAVING A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE, THIS IS THE WAY YOU DEAL WITH IT.

FS: THE

END

OF

OUTCOME.

SEE A

THE DEFICIT IS SIMPLY A MATHEMATICAL RESULT EXPENDITURE AND REVENUE FIGURES, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE AND AS I SAY, IF YOU LOOK TO THE OTHER YEARS, TOO, YOU WILL DEFICIT THERE.

OTHERWISE, IF WE WERE GOING TO GO FOR BALANCED BUDGETS ALL THE WAY UP TO 96-97, THEN OF COURSE THE RESERVES WOULD NOT BE 78 BILLION OFF THE TOP OF THE HEAD, I GUESS THEY WOULD BE

AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE WOULD ARGUE SHOULD BE 140 BILLION OR THEREABOUTS.

140 BILLION

—

ABOUT

THAT

THEY

ARE YOU GOING TO SAY, NOW THAT IT'S QUESTION: NOW,

SAY, NO MORE, SAY, TAX-CONCESSIONS WOULD BE GIVEN,

IN THE LAST YEAR THAT THEY WOULD NOT SUPPORT YOU TO EXPERIENCE THE RATES RAISE AND THEN OR ARE THERE POSSIBLE DEMANDS FROM LEGCO WOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED?

GIVEN

SETTLED THE

RAISE

FS:

A

FOR AND IF IF WE ANSWER.

I AM GOING TO TRY AND BE VERY CAREFUL THIS YEAR

NOT ΤΟ

THAT SAY WHAT I AM GOING TO DO NEXT YEAR; LET'S KEEP

WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SITUATION EVERY YEAR, LATER DECISION. NEXT YEAR WE FIND WE ARE BETTER-OFF, THEN THERE'S ONE ANSWER. FIND WE ARE WORSE-OFF THAN WE EXPECTED, THEN THERE IS ANOTHER I AM NOT GOING TO TRY AND GUESS.

QUESTION:

DEPENDS

THE

PERSONAL STILL A

THE SITUATION THOUGH IS, IT VERY MUCH ON THE DEBATE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS AND WHETHER THEY AGREE

OF SORT

TAX-CONCESSIONS OFFERED BY YOU IN

OF TERMS

AND WHETHER ALLOWANCES,

IS SATISFACTORY, QUESTION TO BE DEBATED

FS:

THEY FIND THAT

OF COURSE, ABSOLUTELY, THERE IS STILL A DEBATE, THERE IS STILL THE FINANCE COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETINGS ON EXPENDITURE AND SO ON, BUT I THINK THE FIRST REACTION HAS BEEN QUITE GOOD.

QUESTION:

MR MACLEOD, IF YOU SAY 140 BILLION RESERVES

IS

TOO MUCH

PS:

-

THAT'S OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I MEAN I AM JUST THINKING

THEM 120 RUNNING THROUGH MY HEAD THE DEFICITS AND ADDING BACK SO IT MAY BE A BIT MORE THAN THAT.

BUT WHAT,

KIND

QUESTION:

BASICALLY, ARE YOUR CRITERIA IN ASSESSING WHICH SORT OF LEVEL OF RESERVES WOULD YOU FIND IT AS A OF APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF RESERVES?

FS:

-

I

WITH LAST YEAR, I SAID I WAS PERFECTLY CONTENT

BILLION, FOR THE FIGURE AT THAT TIME, FOR WHICH THE FORECAST WAS 71 96-97

AROUND BUT YOU KNOW IT HAPPENS TO HAVE GONE UP A LITTLE BIT - THAT LEVEL

PRESENT I THINK IT IS REASONABLE IN

CIRCUMSTANCES. CAREFULLY AVOIDED PRODUCING SOME WONDERFUL FORMULA WHICH WOULD PRODUCE THE ANSWER I WANTED BECAUSE THE FACT IS YOU HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT AT THAT WAS MY THE TIME IN THE LIGHT OF THE RISKS WHICH FACE YOU. JUDMENT.

/QUESTION: