MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): The disparity between the rich and the poor is very serious in Hong Kong, and cross-generational poverty is also pretty common. The Government has been helping the poor to live through various poverty alleviation measures, and at the same time alleviating poverty of the next generation through education. However, with the rapid development of our society and the maturity of our economy, opportunities for young people to move up the social ladder have been drastically reduced, so it is basically more difficult for the next generation of poor to alleviate from poverty on their own. Therefore, I have always considered it necessary for the Government to do more for the poor people at the grass roots.
Today, Dr CHIANG Lai-wan proposed a motion on the setting up of a “New Generation Fund”. She proposes to set up a fund for children under the age of 18 so that all of them will have a fund account. Dr CHIANG Lai-wan has always been concerned about the grass roots of the community, which is very unusual. This motion is about fighting for the rights of poor children. While I admire her goodwill and support the general direction, I believe many problems in respect of timing and implementation must be overcome. After all, it takes time before such a large-scale project can be carried out, including the time for conducting detailed studies and public discussions.
The basic concept of the proposal is definitely good. As to whether it is practicable, one of the important factors is the financial viability of the Government as the Fund will incur a heavy financial commitment, and is a long-term one as well. However, unfortunately, this is not the right time. As a result of the “black-clad violence” and the epidemic, the Government has recorded the worst deficit in history, which will last for five years. Given the resource constraints, it would be difficult for the Government to explore the setting up of a sustainable contributory fund.
Another issue to be considered is the acceptability of Hong Kong people. I believe many parents will agree with the general principle of setting up the Fund, that is, to save for the future needs of their children, which originally is the responsibility of parents. However, if there is a need to make continuous contributions, it will involve the use of huge public financial resources and this may warrant more thought. Furthermore, the questions on whether all middle-class and even well-off families should participate; how much the Government should contribute; how much parents should contribute before they are entitled to certain tax allowances, and how much is needed to be exempted from contributions, will require in-depth discussions in the community and it is unlikely for a certain degree of consensus to be reached.
All in all, the general direction of setting up the “New Generation Fund” is worthy of consideration by the community. However, given the tight public finances and the need for the Government to discuss many details with the community, this is probably not the high time to set up such a fund. Nonetheless, the motion has conveyed a message that the Government must keep a close watch on the support required for children’s growth. This warrants the Government’s attention. Thank you, President.