THE Legislative Council's call for a Central Provident Fund (CPF) is a backward step and not in the best interests of the community, according to the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce and a leading insurer.
Both issued statements yesterday following the Legislative Council's vote on Wednesday in favour of a CPF after a motion debate lasting almost four hours.
The chamber's chief economist, Mr Ian Perkin, said: ''After years of debate on retirement protection . . . the resurrection of the CPF was a negative development.
''The 38-year-old 'Singapore solution' to retirement funding, which has proved so costly to that community, is no example for a forward-looking Hongkong to follow,'' he said.
''A fully-funded CPF is nothing more than an additional tax on employers and employees dressed up under another name.'' Mr Perkin said the Hongkong Government had rightly resisted calls for such a fund in the past.
''The introduction of a CPF would require government administration on a massive scale and lead to the creation of a huge and costly bureaucracy to manage it.