XN000022-1994-07-13 — Page 4

ليا

WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 1994

SOME

HAVE

I SAID THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THESE MATTERS FOR YEARS. PEOPLE TELL ME THAT THEY'VE BEEN DEBATED FOR DECADES. WE REALLY TO DECIDE NOW WHETHER WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD. DEMOGRAPHY

HAS, то SOME EXTENT, REDEFINED THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE ELDERLY PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND, OF COURSE, PEOPLE ARE LIVING LONGER. BUT THE OTHER THING WHICH'S CHANGED IS THAT WE'VE BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL AS A COMMUNITY WE ARE ONE OF THE MOST PROSPEROUS COMMUNITIES IN THE WORLD AND WE REALLY DO TO ASK OURSELVES WHETHER IT'S REASONABLE TO CONTINUE WITHOUT ALLOWING THE ELDERLY WHO'VE HELPED TO CREATE THAT PROSPERITY, SHARE IN A BIT OF IT.

THERE'S ONE FINAL POINT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. SOME PEOPLE SUGGEST THAT THIS IS THE CREATION OF A WELFARE STATE IN HONG KONG. IT'S THE BEGINNING OF A SLIPPERY SLOPE. I DO THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULD JUST HAVE A LOOK AT THE FIGURES. THE TOTAL COST OF THIS SCHEME WHICH REPRESENTS ABOUT ONE AND A HALF PERCENT OF HONG KONG'S OVERALL WEALTH, OUR GDP, IS TYPICAL IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES THAT ARE PAYING 15. PERCENT OF THEIR GDP IN TRANSFER PAYMENTS. SO, NOBODY CAN REGARD THIS AS AN EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE DIS-INCENTIVE FOR BUSINESS OR AS A SOCIALIST BURDEN WHICH HONG KONG IS GOING TO HAVE TO CARRY. IT'S PRUDENT. IT'S RESPONSIBLE. IT'S COMPASSIONATE AND I VERY MUCH HOPE THE COMMUNITY WILL ENDORSE IT IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. WE WILL BE LISTENING DURING THIS CONSULTATION PERIOD TO WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY. IF ANYBODY'S GOT A BETTER IDEA, I HOPE HE'LL PUT IT FORWARD. BUT IT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR PEOPLE TO CARPORT CRITICISE EITHER WE DO MORE FOR THE ELDERLY OR I AM AFRAID WE DON'T LIVE UP TO OUR OBLIGATIONS.

QUESTION: HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THE CRITICISM THAT IT WOULD BECOME A FINANCIAL BURDEN FOR THE FUTURE SAR GOVERNMENT?

THE

GOVERNOR: I'VE JUST ANSWERED THAT QUESTION. I'VE POINTED OUT THAT TOTAL COST REPRESENTS ONE AND A HALF PERCENT OF OUR GDP. WE DELIBERATELY ENSURE WHILE LINKING CONTRIBUTIONS TO BENEFITS, IT IS NOT GOING TO TURN INTO A BLACK HOLE FOR EXPENDITURE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PRUDENTLY MANAGED. WE HAVE BETTER EXPERIENCE IN HONG KONG OF MANAGING OUR AFFAIRS PRUDENTLY THAN ALMOST ANY OTHER COMMUNITY IN THE WORLD. SOME PEOPLE WOULD SAY MORE THAN ANY OTHER COMMUNITY IN THE WORLD, WE ARE NOT ABOUT TO THROW THAT ADVANTAGE AWAY NOW, AND I DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE CAN REASONABLY LECTURE US ON BEING IMPRUDENT OR

IMPROVIDENT.

QUESTION: SINGAPORE HAS A CPF WHICH BASICALLY CONTRIBUTES 20 PERCENT FROM EMPLOYERS AND 20 PERCENT FROM EMPLOYEES. HOW DID YOU SUCH A LOW FIGURE OF ONE AND HALF PERCENT?

ARRIVE AT

THE

GOVERNOR: BECAUSE WE THINK THAT A CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND ISN'T MOST COST-EFFECTIVE WAY OF ACTUALLY HELPING THE ELDERLY, ALL OUR FIGURES ARE SET OUT IN THE CONSULTATION PAPERS, ANY OTHER FIGURES THAT ANYONE WANTS, WE WILL BE ONLY TOO PLEASED TO PROVIDE. THE OTHER THING ΤΟ REMEMBER ABOUT A CPF, ABOUT A PROVIDENT FUND IS THAT I'T WOULDN'T HELP THESE ELDERLY PEOPLE TODAY. IT WOULDN'T HELP THE ELDERLY, AS I SAID EARLIER, FOR A GENERATION. SO, IF WE WANT TO PROVIDE COST- EFFECTIVE HELP NOW, THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT IS, IN OUR JUDGING, THROUGH THE SCHEME BUT WE WILL BE LISTENING. I HOPE THAT ANYBODY WHO THINKS THEY'VE GOT A BETTER SCHEME, WILL DO IT FORWARD BECAUSE WE DO HAVE ΤΟ MAKE DECISIONS. THAT'S WHAT, I THINK, EXECUTIVE-LED GOVERNMENT MEANS,

/QUESTION: