TNAG-0608-FCO40-756-Planning-paper-on-progress-made-on-social-security-in-Hong-K-1977 — Page 84

XCC(77)65

CONFIDENTIAL #

(c)

•

34

Copy No Page 16 of 19

(vi) Benefits paid under the scheme would be taken

into account when assessing the need for public assistance in the same way as benefits paid by an employer.

Contributions, costs and funding

(i)

(ii)

As a start, employers and employees should contribute on an equal footing. The aim would be to keep contributions down to something of the order of 2% each side, 4% in all.

Contributions to the scheme would be paid into a separate statutory fund which would be suitably invested or used for housing loans to members as in b(v) above. The finances of the scheme would be outside the Government's accounts, There would be an independent statutory authority with members appointed by the Governor, which could include a representative(s) of contributors, with responsibility for the finances of the scheme, including the invest- ment of the funds.

(iii) The statutory authority might also be responsible

for the actual administration of the scheme perhaps using staff seconded to it from the Social Welfare Department. But, to keep administrative costs down and to facilitate cross checking with other social security schemes (especially the public assistance scheme - see b(vi) above), personal records of contributors might be kept and payments made by the Social Welfare Department on behalf of the authority. It would seem reasonable that there should be no charge for the services of the Social Welfare Department; and any other administrative costs might also be met from public funds by way of an annual subvention. Such costs would initially be high in proportion to con- tributions. But provided the scheme was reasonably successful, it is thought that the administrative costs might settle down to around 4% of contribution income. (Comparable figures in the UK are 4%, Malaysia 4%, Singapore 3% and Fiji 4%, the latter 3 being for provident funds). If an independent medical board were set up

to deal with claims for an incapacity allowance (see paragraph 28 above) it could also be given responsibility for the certification of claims for benefit under this scheme.

CONFIDENTIAL

機密

of &