XN000022-1995-02-22 — Page 43

· 30 -

The election expense limits for the three tiers of elections are reviewed from time to time. When carrying out such reviews over the years, we have been following the basic principle that the limits must not be so high as to deter aspiring candidates with only limited financial means, nor so low as to make it difficult for candidates to mount an effective campaign. In other words, the election expense limits are to provide, in the spirit of open and fair elections, a level playing field for all candidates.

We have applied the same basic principle in a review which is currently under way on the election expense limits for the September 1995 Legislative Council elections. In addition, we have also taken into account a number of practical considerations. These include:

(i)

constituency sizes;

(ii)

types and scales of electioneering activities likely to be commonly carried out by candidates; and

(iii)

estimated cost of the common expenditure items, bearing in mind inflation in the past four years.

On the above basis, we have arrived at certain preliminary proposals on the appropriate ceilings for the coming Legislative Council elections. These are as follows:

First, for geographical elections, the current ceiling of $200,000 should remain. This proposal recognises the fact that whilst constituency sizes for the 1995 Legislative Council will only be about half that of the existing ones. inflation has gone up by about 50% in the past four years or so. A margin should also be built in to allow for more sophisticated, and therefore more expensive, electioneering activities which have become more common in recent years.

Secondly, for all existing functional constituencies except the Urban Council, the Regional Council, and the Rural constituencies, we propose a ceiling of $80,000. This proposal is principally an adjustment of the current ceiling of $50,000 to off-set inflation.

Thirdly, for the Urban Council, Regional Council, and Rural Council functional constituencies, we again propose status quo, i.e. a ceiling of $50,000. Having regard to the small franchises of these three constituencies and past pattern on election expenses, we believe that this figure should be sufficient meet candidates' campaigning requirements.

to