TNAG-0608-FCO40-756-Planning-paper-on-progress-made-on-social-security-in-Hong-K-1977 — Page 167

Your reference

Our reference

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SECURITY

ALEXANDER FLEMING HOUSE

ELEPHANT AND CASTLE LONDON SE1 6BY

TELEPHONE 01-407 5522 EXT 7417

TED IN

**0. 51

24 March 1977

JA B Stewart Esq OBE

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

King Charles Street

LONDON SW1A 2AH

Jew Stewar

12/8/1

12/5/1

ADVISORY VISIT TO HONG KONG

2 8 MAR 1977

NXX013/2

فالنسيا

Толи Нилск Dim

29/3.

I have now had an opportunity of going through the papers you gave me and comparing them with the material I have received from Hong Kong.

The revised terms of reference for my assignment (a copy of which is attached) are much closer to what you had in mind in your letter of 3 March to Denys Roberts. So far as I am concerned, I think the terms of reference give me a pretty free rein.

-

There was no difference between us the other day on the fact that in this assignment my first responsibility will be to the Hong Kong Government; and that I have been invited there again on that basis. At the same time, I must take account of the views of the UK Government since apart from any other considerations the views of the Hong Kong Government must take account in turn of the views of the UK Government. I should like therefore to sum up briefly how I think we left matters. My brief is to point the way to a viable The UK Government and acceptable development of social security in Hong Kong. would like to see that development taking Hong Kong beyond its present reliance on means-testing; and have suggested that one way of doing so would be to examine the possibility of contributory arrangements. The latter, however, is in the final analysis a means to an end, not an end in itself; and there would be no over-riding objection to social security being developed in other direc- tions, provided these were not means-tested.

I have prepared, as a basis for initial consultations in Hong Kong, a note summarising some of the major considerations that are relevant to the develop- ment of social security in Hong Kong, which I am sending off to Thomas Lee, the Director of Social Welfare. I attach a copy, so that you can see that at this stage I am spreading the net widely. And I am certainly not ruling out contributory benefits, although as I explained in my letter to you of 17 March, I think it might be worth while to indicate to your Ministers that contributory

social insurance is not necessarily the right approach in Hong Kong.

I do not think this letter calls for a reply, and I do not want to burden you with paper but if you had any reservations on the way I was proposing to play this perhaps Milton could give me a ring. My last day in the office is Friday, April 1.

If you want to discuss how things are going when you are in Hong Kong, I shall be glad to do so.

Читат

Lincerlen

سيلا

T SHEPPELL