XN000022-1996-05-30 — Page 15

· 13 -

But let me just add a point to the Honourable gentleman. I'm sure the Honourable gentleman would agree that the Wall Street Journal is a newspaper which thoroughly endorses Hong Kong's approach to economic life, which warmly endorses the successes of the business community in Hong Kong. The Wall Street Journal, not the Asian Wall Street Journal, on May 15, had this to say in an interesting editorial, and it may well be misguided but this is an intelligent newspaper editorialising in Hong Kong: "As the people of Hong Kong find themselves facing seemingly impossible odds in a struggle to maintain liberties they have come to enjoy, it's getting harder to believe in happy endings after China takes over in 1997". That said, they go on: "We're not ready to give up on the Territory and its determined citizens". Now why are they editorialising like that? Because of a list of things which they then set out, many of which have been said or done by Chinese officials and Chinese advisors in the last two or three months. They conclude by saying that what they hope will happen is that more people will speak up for Hong Kong and speak up for Hong Kong's liberties and values. And that is something which I'm sure all of us would say

amen to.

Mr David Chu: I don't have any follow-up question because if I do ask one the Governor may ask me to join him on his trip on the Britannia.

The President: It is a supplementary Governor. You may wish to respond to it.

Governor: Were I to take a trip on the Britannia, it would conceivably be with even more aristocratic, royal figures than the Honourable gentleman. A trip on the Britannia conceivably, a round the world cruise, I think perhaps the Honourable gentleman and I would both find that a bit too much.

The President: Mr Chu might invite you to ride on one of his Harley Davidson's which still have ups and downs.

Ms Chan Yuen-han (in Chinese): Mr President, coming back to the question of sewage charges, I wonder if the Governor is aware of this: when we have certain policies those policies will affect the livelihood of people. Now, we talk about the polluter- pays principle and we are also charging domestic sewage charges and so the point is, when your policy has been accepted will you then in implementation reflect the livelihood and interests of the general public, because there might be wrong calculations and the impact might be extremely great?

Governor: I agree with the honourable lady that we have to be very careful about the impact of a principle like polluter-pays, which is fine in theory, on the household budgets of individual families. As the Honourable lady knows, we have tried to ensure that those in the greatest need do not pay these charges or pay much less. And I think I am right in saying that about 60% of households will only have, as a result of the proposed increases, to pay about between $1 and $2.50 per month extra, and that 16% of domestic households will still pay nothing. So that is well over three-quarters who are paying a pretty limited amount.