XN000022-1996-01-24 — Page 30

4

What would be the consequence of moves to artificially suppress profits, or subsidise services from the public purse? We do not have to speculate, we can report from direct observation of communities that have gone down these routes. Without a reasonable profit, there is no new investment and the service declines. This obviously applies to private companies. It tends to apply also but more subtly to public corporations also. Because if an operation does not pay its own way, then it ends up competing for resources with other public services. More kidney machines for our hospitals, or more new buses? More computers in school, or more carriages on the MTR train? More welfare facilities, or more modem ferries? And so on. And the result is always the same: the standard of the utility service gradually declines as over the years it loses out in the battle for resources. The commuter who saves 50 cents on his bus fare may thank you tomorrow. But what will he say to you in two years' time when he is walking to work? Or at least spending twice as long in the queue. To borrow an analogy used by Ms Chan Yuen-han, there are not many Forrest Gumps in Hong Kong.

Mr President, I do not propose to repeat all the familiar but sound arguments on fees and charges, or on public housing rents. These have been well covered by the Secretary for the Treasury and the Secretary for Housing. In conclusion let me just say this.

No-one doubts the motives of those who want to improve the livelihood of our community. After all that is one of the prime objectives of the Government too. What is at issue is how best to do so. At a time when the economy is facing challenges on many fronts and growing more slowly, I can well understand Members' frustration: indeed I share it. But we have to recognise that this is the low point of the economic cycle. That despite this, we still maintain a respectable growth of about 5%, with inflation easing and unemployment stabilised. And that provided we hold true to our economic and budgetary principles, we can and will maintain the steady growth that will improve the livelihood of all.

With these remarks, I urge Members to oppose the motion in any form.

End

:Page 31