it, they can always apply for grants and loans. That is the question.
25
3
SEM:
Well, there was a decision taken in 1982 to
increase fees and increased fees up 'til 1988-89 have already been
agreed internally. The present further revision which I have just been talking about, is to carry on the previous revision for the period 7 beyond 1989.
8
9
MR CHEONG:
ent
I see. So you have already looked into the
10
issue in 1982.
.ght
11
it
12
SEM:
Yes.
13
14
MR CHEONG:
In a bid to catch up.
15
ect
16
SEM:
Yes.
lic
We started catching up in the period
17
:ati
18
from 1983 onwards and what we are now looking at is carrying that
process further.
19
20
is
tha
al
222
24
ed.
MR CHEONG:
But if I simply do a little bit of calculation, the percentage terms in relation to recurrent cost, it doesn't seem
that you are catching up in such a fast rate. If I may quote some percentage terms in relation to total recurrent cost. In terms of Hong Kong U. in the year 1981-82 it is 3.7%; in terms of Chinese U. 25 it is 5.5%. In the year 1982-83 your fee recovery goes down to
26 3.5 and Chinese U. goes down to 4.9. In the year 1983-84 it goes up
27
22222
28
to 4% and 5.1%. In the year '84-85 it is 4.4 to 6. So basically you
are doing it roughly at the percentage points of half a per cent a 29 year. Based on historical figures. And as you said that level of
increases has been agreed.
30
ce
31
32
33
34
ok
it
35
ord
36
SEM:
Yes.
MR CHEONG:
So that, you know, through to 1989 it would
-
is it the sort of
only catch up by half a per cent a year which
reasonable rate that the Branch think that is the level it should be?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.