Issues
Related topics Hong Kong
Brief introduction to the issue Fuse: In the budget of 2011-2012 (announced on 23/2/2011), Financial Secretary John Tsang announced that the government has reserved $24 billion to deposit$6000 to the MPF account of the citizens who meet the requirement. Citizens criticized that this policy is not comprehensive enough (housewives, self-employed, civil servants are not included). On 2/3/2011, John Tsang announced that every permanent citizen aged 18 or above can get $6000. But immigrants are ignored.
1. Views from different parties and stance Hong Kong permanent citizens They believe the immigrants have no contribution to the society, but demand to have such welfare, which is unjust and greedy. They also believe this measure is not beneficial to the development of Hong Kong. The $24 billion should be used to solve the social conflict and contradiction, like housing problems, high inflation rate, etc. Solving 6000 is only responding to public demand, but the measure is very short-term and can do nothing with the contradictions. Even worse, the 6000 will stimulate consumption, lead to higher inflation rate, which means intensifying social contradiction.
( giving out Today $6000 to the Interpersonal mainland immigrants) relationship
Result: This again arouses criticism. Society for Community Organization(, ) warns that if the government does not distribute $6000, it violates Basic Law and will sue the government. Equal Opportunities Commission urges the government to help the immigrants through the Community Care Fund(). Finally, the government announced that the immigrants who can pass the income assessment () ( less than $6500 for single family, less than 14600 for family with 2 people)can get
Scholar
They believe the policy is not for future investment. Also, to start the scheme to distribute money, citizens will have expectations to the government for money. The government may be forced to distribute money every year ( to response to public demand) if the government doesnt discuss with the government the distributing mechanisms. ( like in Macau) Political Party& Community Care Fund
The Community Care Fund was originally set up to help the poor and reduce poverty. However, the government uses it to distribute money to the poor, which doesnt comply with the original objectives. Also, political party afraid that using Community Care Fund to distribute 6000 to immigrants, the CCF will turn to be tailor-made for immigrants and attract more immigrants to move to HK.
6000. However, local citizens are discontented with the decision. After the announcement of the government, over 40% of the survey interviewees reveal that their impression to government worsens.
: Immigrants They believe they are also Hong Kong citizens as they also have the identity cards. They should be treated fairly and enjoy equal rights as to the local citizens. When the government decided to distribute 6000 to Hong Kong citizens, it should be fair and distribute the equal amount to them. Immigrants are discriminated and labelled by local residents.If the governemnt doesnt treat them fairly, this will intensify the societys labelling and discriminatoy acts. Also, immigrants are very poor. Women have to rely on their husbans, their qualifications are not recognised and they only have lowpaid job. They are the groups that need the help and assistance from the government the most. And improving their lives can also reduce the vicious cycle of poverty and improve the lives of future generatiosn too. Suggestions: Distribute half of the amount to those who havent stayed in Hong Kong for 7 years to avoid discontent. In fact, this amount is comparatively small as compared to the whole sum of 24 Billion. Invest for the future ( follow Singapore)- consider the need of citizens In Singapore, the government provides money for citizens, but for education and medical purpose. There are also assistance scheme like refund of water and electricity charges, which are directly pinpointing the need of citizens.
Motive: ,enhance social harmony ,reduce poverty (in fact, the government didnt mention the aim of the policy. This is depicted by a scholar )
