Public service charges accounted for less than 4 per cent, or HK$21 billion, of total revenue, estimated to be HK$543 billion, according to the 2023-24 budget.

A Post check found fees had been frozen for years or even decades on a number of public services.

For example, water charges – priced at up to HK$9.05 per cubic metre – have been frozen since 1995. The government also waived 75 per cent of water and sewage charges of non-domestic households during the pandemic.

Admission and hire charges for venues under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department are unchanged since 2013. Booking an air-conditioned basketball court costs from HK$60 to HK$148 per hour, depending on the time.

Public healthcare charges, meanwhile, were last adjusted in 2017.

In the last financial year, the Hospital Authority, the statutory body that operates the city’s public hospitals and clinics, earned HK$5.2 billion from patient charges, with the fee for attending an accident and emergency unit costing HK$180, for example.

But the authority still largely relies on government subvention.

The biggest share of government income comes from duties, general rates, internal revenue, property and investment.

Chan said the government would maintain its competitiveness in the global market by keeping the tax regime simple. He also promised to ensure that underprivileged groups would continue to receive support through the social security net.

Other strategies he mentioned included seeking alternative financing models for infrastructure projects that involved longer timelines, possibly involving the private sector.

Terence Chong Tai-leung, executive director of Chinese University’s Lau Chor Tak Institute of Global Economics and Finance, said the government was likely to “lose more than it gains”, considering the charges’ tiny share of its income.

“You can’t benefit a lot from increasing public service charges, but you will affect a lot of people, especially the underprivileged,” he said.

Chong added that even if the government introduced subsidies to reduce the burden of the needy, the move was likely to generate expensive administrative costs, which were also wasteful.

The government should instead focus on tackling the failure to sell plots of land, which was the crux of the deficit, by relaxing property curbs to increase market sentiment, he said.

Economist Simon Lee Siu-po, an honorary fellow at Chinese University’s Asia-Pacific Institute of Business, also poured cold water on the idea.

“The government was probably left with no solution,” he said. “But what Hong Kong lacks is the attractiveness, both to invest and to spend in the city.”

Lee said it was important to improve the overall business environment, noting the national security law was one factor affecting foreign investors’ confidence in the city, and subsequently government revenue.

“Even if we managed to earn an extra HK$100 million from parking tickets every month, our catering businesses are losing a billion dollars as residents are not spending here,” he said.

“Shouldn’t we do more to stimulate business activities, instead of focusing on trivial revenues?”

He added that sluggish business in the retail and catering industries also directly affected land sales, another major source of government revenue.

Asked whether the government should review the tax base, seen by some critics as too narrow, Lee said it was hard to generate substantial revenue from the local economy, which was sluggish. It would be more practical for the city’s economy to recover to pre-pandemic levels before reviewing the tax base.

Sam Wong Kai-hing, director of Concern for Grassroots’ Livelihood Alliance, said increasing public service charges would inevitably affect the needy, who had struggled to benefit from the post-pandemic recovery.

“The measure may cause panic among low-income groups – is this just the beginning? Will there be more welfare cuts?” he said. “They should not be the ones to bear the cost of a deficit.”

Wong said he hoped the government could offer more assurances to ease their worries.

A number of residents that the Post spoke to were not happy with the idea of increasing public service charges either.

“I don’t mind if they charge more for public sports facilities because I don’t use them, but it’s fundamentally unfair,” said designer Lizzy Lee, 29.

“The government’s financial issues are not caused by us. Why should common citizens bear the burden? Everyone is struggling to make ends meet.”

Teacher Alex Cheung, 55, said it was “wrong” for the government to look for money from residents. “I don’t want to pay more for any of these,” he said.

Additional reporting by Jack Deng