· 5-
Mr President, let me return to what I began. I said in this Council that an OPS would be implemented subject to the endorsement of our proposals by the community. Such endorsement has not been forthcoming. I refute entirely any suggestions that we have manipulated or ignored public opinions on the OPS. It is abundantly clear that there is no mandate to proceed with the OPS as proposed in the paper. It took us seven months to design the OPS, a further three and a half months for the consultation period, and another three months to assess the results of such consultation. The door to the OPS will not be reopened. We must move on towards an alternative means of providing financial security for our elderly people. Early this evening Members have already passed the motion urging the Government to introduce as expeditiously as possible a mandatory publicly managed occupational retirement system. We will proceed with the consultancy on the MPF immediately. Implementation of the OPS in addition to the MPF would be totally unacceptable and will place intolerable burden on contributors, employers and employees, and must be rejected in the public interest. For, the reasons given above and later on by the Secretary for Health and Welfare, the ex-officio Members will vote against both the Motion and the Amendment. I urge Members to do so.
End/Wednesday, March 8, 1995
LegCo adopts Govt motion on MPF
The Legislative Council today (Wednesday) passed a Government motion for the establishment of a mandatory, privately managed occupational retirement protection system (MPF) with provision for the preservation and portability of benefits.
The proposed MPF will include the following main features:
10
it would be mandatory for every employer to establish a retirement scheme for his employees under the age of 65
it would be a joint contribution scheme by employees and employers there would be a statutory minimum contribution, of which the employer should pay half
there would be a minimum salary level, below which an employee might elect not to participate in a scheme
there would be a maximum salary level above which statutory contributions would not be required
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.