CONFIDENTIAL
DSR 11C
16.
This raises the Governor's point in his Despatch about not becoming excessively locked into recurrent expenditure unless it can be financed in straightened circumstances. Would it not in fact be prudent to steer clear of 'open-ended' social welfare expenditure?
*
•
This is very much a matter of opinion. To the extent that social provi-
sion for minimum needs is thought not already to be available then it
could be argued that this is one area where public funds simply must be
set aside regardless of the state of business activity. As to whether the private sector (and the existing public assistance scheme) really is making
adequate provision, this is a question of fact on which there is very little in the way of hard evidence (the reports in question 13 apart") (Indeed, the paucity of statistics in Hong Kong raises the additional question of how the criteria for the award (or withholding) of social welfare benefits might in practice actually be determined.) We do know, however, from the Despatch, that the (private) Provident Scheme launched
by the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation has met with only
limited success. It might also be noted that in 1968 the then Financial
Secretary argued that he saw no reason on budgetary grounds why primary
education should be wholly financed from public funds either, since here,
too, provision could be made privately. In fact, however, primary educa-
tion is provided 'free'.
the Lady Williams Report, 1966, and the Report of the Hong Kong Inter-Departmental Group on Social Security, 1967.
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.