Welfare Development in Hong Kong by MikeJenny

VIEWS: 12 PAGES: 17

									Welfare Development in Hong Kong
Policy Areas                UK                                          HK
   Social    1601/1834 Poor Law                         1971 – Public Assistance Scheme
  Security   1908 – Old Age Pension Act                 (1966, Professor, Gertrude
              (Non-contributory, means tested)          Williams, London U, recommend
              1911 National Insurance Act               social insurance, but not followed)
              (contributory, against sickness and
              unemployment)
 Education    1880 (Schooling compulsory for            1971 Compulsory primary
              children between the ages of five and     education/ 1978 – 9 years
              ten)                                      compulsory education
 Housing      1919 (Housing and Town Planning           1954 (Shek KipMei)
              Act (Addison Act), state built low-rent   1972 (10 Years Building Prog.)
              houses (council houses)
  Health      1946 NHS (hospitals, family or            1963 – Ten year plan for the
              primary-care practitioners,               expansion of medical services (The
              community-based services)                 development of medical services in
                                                        Hong Kong) “providing low cost or
                                                        free medical and personal health
                                                        services to that large section of the
                                                        community which is unable to seek
                                                        medical attention from other
                                                        sources”
Retirement    1946 National Security Act                2000 MPF
From colonial period to present
 1842-1952 Colonial system and minimal policy / 1945-
    1965 The Golden Age ofVoluntarism
   Partial Social Policy 1953-70
   The ‘Big Bang’ Social Policy, 1971-77
   Incremental Social Policy, 1978 to 1997
   Trends after 1997
Colonial system and minimal policy / The
Golden Age of Voluntarism
 1907 – Hong Kong College of Medicine, later became HKU
  in 1911
 1872 – Tung Wah by local business, followed by Po Leung
  Kuk in 1882 (protect women and children from kidnapping)
 After WWI, SA,YMCA,YWCA started their operations in
  HK
 1945 Colonial Office - „Social Welfare in the Colonies‟
 Little was done - 1) fear/uncertain of its future, 2)
  population - mobile and transient
 1947/48 – Establishment of Social Welfare Office (SWO)
  under the Secretary of Chinese Affairs (華民政務司)
 1948 – Housing Society
  Partial Social Policy 1953-70
 1952 Christmas Shek Kei Mei squatter fire
 1958 Social Welfare Department
 1964 – Housing White Paper
   responsibility of the government in the housing of the squatter
    population, setting up of Housing Board
 1965 –White Paper on Social Welfare Aims and Policy
   promote independent living, „positive rehabilitation as
    opposed to the establishment of the soup kitchen‟, preserve,
    support and reinforce the family – thus family service
   Expenditure was to be met by economic growth, not
    through new taxes
   No contributory scheme
   Not social rights
The ‘Big Bang’ Social Policy, 1971-77

 Factors: critical events, political leadership, new
  political elites, impact of mass media
 1966 and 67 Riots
 1971 Public Assistance Scheme (CSSA in 1993), followed by
  OAA & DA (1973)
 1972 Universal Free Primary Education
 1973 A While Paper on Social Welfare in Hong Kong: The
  Way Ahead
 74-75 welfare expenditure has increased to 212.5 million, 65%
    more than the previous year)
   1973 – New Housing Authority 10 years housing programme
    for 1.5 million
   1973 – Revised medical and health services
   1977 – Personal social work
   1978 - HOS (Home Ownership Scheme)
   1978 - 9 Years free and compulsory education
Incremental Social Policy, 1978 - 1997
 Generally, more conservative (Planning philosophy of disjointed
  incrementalism in public policy
 1980 Social Welfare into the 1980's (White Paper)
 HK – growth in government expenditure are rather in line with
  the economic growth
 1991 White Paper on Social Welfare – “while there will always be
  room for greater contribution from public funds, it is not
  desirable to move towards providing a western-style
  welfare state… It is also accepted that increased public
  contributions should allow for expansion and improvement of
  services rather than to justifying a reduction in Government‟s
  commitment of resources”. .
 Hong Kong style of welfarism
 “The challenge for Hong Kong is to improve services without
  creating the sort of dependency culture… that removes the
  incentive to work….” (Social Welfare White Paper, chapter 3, para 5)
 "Full employment should be the government's single most
  important welfare objective.” Chris Patten
 “要緩減貧富懸殊,最佳方法是增加就業…基層市
  民未能受惠於經濟復蘇…至於具體緩減貧富懸殊的
  措施,要從就業方面著手,要創造職位,使經濟更
  暢旺,提高香港的競爭力。” 曾蔭權
Trends after 1997
 Budget deficit after Asian financial crisis, surplus in 2006
  onwards
 Surge in social security spending (CSSA 3.5 bn in 94/95
  to over 18 bn now)
 CSSA rate close to household income of low income
  groups (trigger anti-welfare sentiment)
 Overdue of welfare planning
What accounts for welfare in Hong
Kong?
 Colonial legacy (migrants, geo-politics, different priorities)
 Political doctrine (law and order+free market + family
  responsibilities)
 Cultural factors or persuasion? (White Paper (welfare would
  erode the traditional functions of the family)
 Political realities and rising expectations
   Weak Labor movement, little bargaining power and weak social democratic agenda
   1966/67 political turmoil
   Prosperity and de-colonization/democratization
   Anti-welfare persuasion (“we are all aware of demagogues and their gospel of
     “free lunches” and the possibility of turn Hong Kong into a welfare state.
     These people do not hesitate to bribe the masses rather than to build for our
     future‟ )

								
To top