LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 9355 OFFICIAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Thursday, 14 April 2011 The Council continued to meet at Nine o'clock MEMBERS PRESENT: THE PRESIDENT THE HONOURABLE JASPER TSANG YOK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALBERT HO CHUN-YAN IR DR THE HONOURABLE RAYMOND HO CHUNG-TAI, S.B.S., S.B.ST.J., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEE CHEUK-YAN DR THE HONOURABLE DAVID LI KWOK-PO, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FRED LI WAH-MING, S.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE MARGARET NG THE HONOURABLE JAMES TO KUN-SUN THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG MAN-KWONG THE HONOURABLE CHAN KAM-LAM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS SOPHIE LEUNG LAU YAU-FUN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG YIU-CHUNG DR THE HONOURABLE PHILIP WONG YU-HONG, G.B.S. 9356 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 THE HONOURABLE WONG YUNG-KAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU KONG-WAH, J.P. THE HONOURABLE LAU WONG-FAT, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MIRIAM LAU KIN-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE EMILY LAU WAI-HING, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW CHENG KAR-FOO THE HONOURABLE TIMOTHY FOK TSUN-TING, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TAM YIU-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ABRAHAM SHEK LAI-HIM, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE LI FUNG-YING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE TOMMY CHEUNG YU-YAN, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE FREDERICK FUNG KIN-KEE, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE AUDREY EU YUET-MEE, S.C., J.P. THE HONOURABLE VINCENT FANG KANG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-HING, M.H. THE HONOURABLE LEE WING-TAT DR THE HONOURABLE JOSEPH LEE KOK-LONG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE JEFFREY LAM KIN-FUNG, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE ANDREW LEUNG KWAN-YUEN, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG HOK-MING, G.B.S., J.P. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 9357 THE HONOURABLE WONG TING-KWONG, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE RONNY TONG KA-WAH, S.C. THE HONOURABLE CHIM PUI-CHUNG PROF THE HONOURABLE PATRICK LAU SAU-SHING, S.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE KAM NAI-WAI, M.H. THE HONOURABLE CYD HO SAU-LAN THE HONOURABLE STARRY LEE WAI-KING, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE LAM TAI-FAI, B.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN HAK-KAN THE HONOURABLE PAUL CHAN MO-PO, M.H., J.P. THE HONOURABLE CHAN KIN-POR, J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PRISCILLA LEUNG MEI-FUN DR THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KA-LAU THE HONOURABLE CHEUNG KWOK-CHE THE HONOURABLE WONG SING-CHI THE HONOURABLE WONG KWOK-KIN, B.B.S. THE HONOURABLE IP WAI-MING, M.H. THE HONOURABLE IP KWOK-HIM, G.B.S., J.P. THE HONOURABLE MRS REGINA IP LAU SUK-YEE, G.B.S., J.P. DR THE HONOURABLE PAN PEY-CHYOU 9358 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 THE HONOURABLE PAUL TSE WAI-CHUN DR THE HONOURABLE SAMSON TAM WAI-HO, J.P. THE HONOURABLE ALAN LEONG KAH-KIT, S.C. THE HONOURABLE LEUNG KWOK-HUNG THE HONOURABLE TANYA CHAN THE HONOURABLE ALBERT CHAN WAI-YIP THE HONOURABLE WONG YUK-MAN PUBLIC OFFICERS ATTENDING: THE HONOURABLE HENRY TANG YING-YEN, G.B.M., G.B.S., J.P. THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION THE HONOURABLE JOHN TSANG CHUN-WAH, G.B.M., J.P. THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY THE HONOURABLE WONG YAN-LUNG, S.C., J.P. THE SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE THE HONOURABLE STEPHEN LAM SUI-LUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS THE HONOURABLE AMBROSE LEE SIU-KWONG, G.B.S., I.D.S.M., J.P. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY THE HONOURABLE TSANG TAK-SING, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR HOME AFFAIRS THE HONOURABLE MATTHEW CHEUNG KIN-CHUNG, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR LABOUR AND WELFARE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 9359 PROF THE HONOURABLE K C CHAN, S.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY THE HONOURABLE MRS CARRIE LAM CHENG YUET-NGOR, G.B.S., J.P. SECRETARY FOR DEVELOPMENT MR GREGORY SO KAM-LEUNG, J.P. SECRETARY FOR COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MR ROBIN IP MAN-FAI HEAD, CENTRAL POLICY UNIT MS JULIA LEUNG FUNG-YEE, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES AND THE TREASURY MR YAU SHING-MU, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR TRANSPORT AND HOUSING PROF GABRIEL MATTHEW LEUNG, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH MISS ADELINE WONG CHING-MAN, J.P. UNDER SECRETARY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AND MAINLAND AFFAIRS CLERKS IN ATTENDANCE: MRS CONSTANCE LI TSOI YEUK-LIN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MRS JUSTINA LAM CHENG BO-LING, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL MRS PERCY MA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY GENERAL 9360 LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 BILLS Committee Stage CHAIRMAN (in Cantonese): Good morning, Members. Committee now resumes. I believe it would not be possible for us to finish all the items on the Agenda this morning. In order to enable Members to attend the scheduled luncheon with the Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of District Councils, I will suspend the meeting at 12.30 pm and resume it at 2.30 pm. We will now continue to deal with the Committee stage amendments of Appropriation Bill 2011 proposed by the Financial Secretary regarding head 106. Does any Member wish to speak? APPROPRIATION BILL 2011 DR JOSEPH LEE (in Cantonese): Good morning, Chairman. We are having a heated debate on the $6,000 cash handout in this Chamber. In fact, over the past week or two, I learnt that my friends, members of my profession and even the elderly persons have been discussing the $6,000 cash handout. The Government originally proposed to inject $6,000 into the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) accounts, but the proposal has been revised to hand out $6,000 to Hong Kong permanent residents aged 18 or more. People have divergent views in the course of discussion. Some people said that the cash handout is unfair and would give rise to discrimination, while some queried why the Government proposed to spend such a large sum of money to hand out $6,000 for all Hong Kong people, instead of using the money to improve people's livelihood, like providing better healthcare, education and elderly welfare services. My friends and members of my profession have engaged in heated discussions, and they finally came up with a very interesting question: What is the problem of the Government's handing out of $6,000 to us, who are eligible for the handout? No one can answer. People may also ask: Are we going to receive the $6,000? No one has refused to receive the cash handout. As far as I understand, the issue under discussion is not how the Government will hand out the $6,000, but the Government's proposal to take this opportunity to hand out $6,000 to all eligible people. Although my friends and members of my profession have expressed different views on the approach adopted by the LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 14 April 2011 9361 Financial Secretary in this case, they see eye to eye on two questions, that is, what is wrong with the $6,000 cash handout to us and whether or not we should accept the $6,000. No one thinks there is any problem, and nobody has refused to receive the cash handout. Some people have decided to donate the $6,000 upon receipt. Yesterday, someone rang me up after listening to this Council's debate on the amendment concerning the euthanization of cats and dogs, and told me that he decided to use the $6,000 to sponsor cats and dogs. Yesterday afternoon, a group of students came to discuss with me about the $6,000. One student said $6,000 was a significant amount. Since it cost him $20 to have lunch at the Open University, he could pay for 300 lunches with $6,000. We can therefore see that different people will have different ways of spending the $6,000. Being a teacher, a representative of my profession or a friend, I respect their views. No one thinks that there are problems handing out $6,000 to us, and nobody has refused to accept the money. And yet, the proposed cash handout to all members of the public does involve a large sum of money. My friend has put forth a pretty unrealistic proposal. After handing out this huge sum of money, would the Financial Secretary consider allocating the same amount of money for improving people's livelihood, say, improving the welfare services for the elderly, as well as healthcare and education services. It would make everybody happy if the Financial Secretary really accedes to this request and allocates a similar amount of money for these purposes. One may ask, given that the Government's proposed handout of $6,000 to everyone will use up a large sum of money, does it mean that a certain amount of money will be taken from other areas, thereby resulting in a reduction of welfare services for the elderly, as well as education or healthcare services? Another friend also asked me, would the handout of $6,000 result in a longer waiting time for public hospitals services from one month to one year? Or, would the Government cut the resources allocated to education such that students could no longer receive grant and loan? I cannot answer these questions.