********************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon James Tien and a reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Matthew Cheung Kin-chung, in the Legislative Council today (January 8):
Question:
The Court of Final Appeal (CFA) has earlier delivered its judgment on an appeal, lodged by a new arrival who came to settle in Hong Kong, against the rejection of her application for Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA), declaring that the requirement of seven-year residence in Hong Kong (residence requirement) stipulated by the Government for the CSSA Scheme was unconstitutional. As a result, the residence requirement must be restored to one year. Some members of the public have expressed the concern that the shortening of the residence requirement might have far reaching impact on Hong Kong, including a possible substantial increase in welfare expenditure. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that the Government has advised that it is comprehensively assessing the impact of CFA judgment, of the way in which such an assessment is being conducted and its specific scope, as well as when it will publish the assessment outcome;
(b) given that Article 145 of the Basic Law specifies that "[o]n the basis of the previous social welfare system," the Government may "on its own, formulate policies on the development and improvement of this system in the light of the economic conditions and social needs", whether the Government will, in view of the shortening of the residence requirement under the CSSA Scheme, adjust its policies or adopt corresponding measures, e.g. requesting the mainland authorities to set "financially self-sufficient and possession of earning capacity" as one of the conditions for approving Mainlanders' applications for settlement in Hong Kong, so as to ensure proper use of public resources; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(c) whether it has studied if the shortening of the residence requirement under the CSSA Scheme will place a heavy financial burden on Hong Kong, as well as the solution to that problem; if it has conducted such a study and the outcome indicates that seeking the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress is the only solution, whether the Government will do so?
Reply :
President,
My reply to the Hon James Tien's question is set out below:
(a) and (c) The Court of Final Appeal (CFA) handed down the judgment of a judicial review case on the residence requirement of the Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Scheme on December 17, 2013. The judgment declared that the "seven-year residence requirement" was unconstitutional and that the Government should restore the "one-year residence requirement" which was in effect before January 1, 2004.
The Social Welfare Department (SWD) will comply with the Court's judgment and process the applications according to the applicable procedures. The Government will not seek interpretation of the Basic Law from the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.
As at the end of November 2013, there were a total of some 261 000 CSSA cases. The total number of recipients fell below 400 000, which was about 397 000. The caseload was the lowest since September 2002 and had been dropping for 32 months. This, to a certain extent, reflects that most Hong Kong people wish to be self-reliant. In addition, the Government has put in place a number of measures to enhance work incentive and alleviate poverty in recent years, including the statutory minimum wage, Work Incentive Transport Subsidy and programmes under the Community Care Fund. These measures, coupled with a robust economy resulting in a keen demand for labour and an increase in employment opportunities, help prevent our citizens from falling into the CSSA net.
In fact, since the implementation of the "seven-year residence requirement", SWD has been exempting persons under the age of 18 from residence requirement under CSSA. In addition, SWD may exercise discretion to grant CSSA to new arrivals aged 18 or above in cases of genuine hardship. Since the implementation of the "seven-year residence requirement" and until the end of October 2013, SWD exercised discretion to approve over 14 000 applications. The Government's mechanism has all along been providing considerable flexibility.
The CSSA expenditure will increase owing to the relaxation of the residence requirement. In the three weeks since CFA handed down the judgment and until January 6 this year, SWD has received altogether 1 407 CSSA applications involving persons residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years.
The actual financial impact of the CFA judgment on the CSSA Scheme mainly depends on the financial situation of new arrivals and those who have resided in Hong Kong for some time, as well as their interest in applying for CSSA. In fact, the education level and family income of new arrivals have been on a rising trend. For instance, the proportion of new arrivals aged 15 and above who have attained secondary education level or above increased from 68% in 2001 to 85% in 2011. It is noteworthy that the proportion with post-secondary education level rose from 6% to 16%. Meanwhile, the median monthly domestic household income of households with member(s) residing in Hong Kong for less than seven years also increased by nearly 20%, from $12,050 to $14,070 over the same period. The Government could only more accurately estimate the effect of the CFA judgment on public finance after the new requirement has been in place for some time.
I have to point out that the CFA judgment was specific to the CSSA Scheme. It is clear that there are particular policy objectives and backgrounds for different welfare measures and public services (e.g. public rental housing). CFA did not lump together all Government assistance programmes. CFA clearly pointed out that the judgment should not be applied generally to the application arrangements for other programmes.
(b) There are suggestions to include the means of Mainland applicants as an eligibility criterion for One-way Permit (OWP). Pursuant to Article 22(4) of the Basic Law, for entry into Hong Kong, people from other parts of China must apply for approval. Mainland residents who wish to enter Hong Kong must apply for OWP from the Exit and Entry Administration Offices of the Public Security Bureau of the Mainland at the places of their household registration. The policy objective of the OWP Scheme is to allow Mainland residents to come to Hong Kong for family reunion in an orderly manner through approval by the Mainland authorities in accordance with the laws and regulations of the Mainland. In the OWP approval process, Mainland residents who meet the eligibility criteria laid down by the Mainland authorities may apply to come to settle in Hong Kong. The current quota is 150 per day. The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government does not see any justifications or needs to change the existing OWP Scheme to add other administrative screening criteria.
Ends/Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Issued at HKT 14:36
NNNN
