TNAG-1609-FCO40-22131-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1987 — Page 141

"

le

11

too rapidly. Those earning less than the average wage,

or contributing for less than 40 years,

from their compulsory lifetime

could expect

saving s a retirement

tance threshold.

income below the public Assistan

XT.

And let us be clear what we mean by compulsory

savings. We mean that employers would be forced to set

up

retirement schemes. Employees would be forced to

join, and to contribute for their entire working lives.

Contributions would have to remain in tact until

retirement. Retiring workers would be forced to invest

their lifetime

saving s in approved ways.

believe that such extensive

the financial affairs of so

practice be popular.

I do not

government interference in

many individuals would in

·

18.

Those who argue that we should aim for a lesser

goal, for example simply to ensure for everyone som e

sort of nest-egg which will provide psychological rather

than true practical benefit, merely destroy the case for

compulsion; does it really make sense to

to incur so many

disadvantages for such a tenuous advantage? Alternatively,

SC Mr. TAM Yiu-chung and other supporters of the CPF have argued that the

scheme could be improved by a government subsidy to the contributions

of the lower-paid. In fact they are proposing that CPF should be

used as a rather complicated device for channelling welfare payment

to the lower-paid. It is difficult to see what advantage this would

have over our present system of allowances get the people's actual needs.

: