Nothing is calculated to strike fear into the Hong Kong heart more than news of increases in welfare spending. After revealing an 88 per cent rise in expenditure on items like CSSA payments over the past five years, Secretary for Treasury Denise Yue Chung-yee has paved the way nicely for wholesale public support for a cutback in handouts.
If the improvement in the economy continues, there is every justification for it. Jobless figures are creeping down. The number of welfare claimants will drop considerably over the year. And there can be no argument against putting a time limit on benefits for those long-term unemployed who make no effort to find work.
Balanced against this is the increasing numbers of aged who need government support. It will be a struggle to keep welfare spending in single digits; but this is clearly the Government's target. It has to do so without causing hardship to those in genuine need and, if that is possible, welfare is obviously the place to start making cuts.
There are few other areas that offer the same opportunity. Savings are not possible in education, health or the environment. Improvements have to be made in the number of schools and in the standard of teaching and educational facilities if the next generation is to sustain the SAR's ambitions as the technological hub of Asia. And if the 7.6 per cent increase in environmental funding looks generous, it should be weighed against the inadequate $3.9 billion that is the total allocation. This is a poor show for a city pledged to clean up its poisoned atmosphere and filthy seas. When the Treasury succeeds in bringing expenditure into line with GDP, there should be pressure to see this sum increased to a realistic level.
Although the Treasury has done well to stay within limits set by the Financial Secretary, there is still room for savings. The transfer of Civil Service chief Lam Woon-kwong has caused speculation about the Government's determination to push on with its reforms.
It would be unfortunate if the momentum is lost. More trimming could be done on benefits and staffing levels without depriving staff of their elevated status. Costs everywhere have to be brought down to improve our competitive edge.