Introduction

Just now Mrs. Cartland talked about the changing CSSA scheme, and I am going to share with you my understanding of the system. The CSSA scheme has become so complex that we have to do something in order to make it more efficient and also more effective as a safety net. Of course, I think it is true that there is always room for improvement, no matter how efficient and effective the scheme is at a given point in time. Things do change over time, and as the system becomes too complex, we have to do something to make it better.

The CSSA scheme started in 1971. Since then we had a number of major revamps of the system. A green paper on welfare was published in 1977, and a white paper in 1991. The most important change was the introduction of a number of supplements, like old age, sickness and disability, on top of the basic subsistence support. The supplements are meant to take care of the special needs or additional needs of the recipients. Another major change was in 1981 when the scale rate was revised upward. Then in 1992 there was a review of the system and the name of scheme was changed from "Public Assistance" to "Comprehensive Social Security Assistance" (CSSA). We now have 8 years of experience with the current system. It is time for us to look at it again.

Just now, Mrs. Cartland talked about the rapid increase in CSSA expenditures and the rise in the number of cases in the 1990s. I remember in 1991/1992, the expenditure in the PA scheme did not exceed one billion dollars. We have seen a 12-time increase in CSSA spending in the past decade. Besides the rapid increase in expenditure, there was also a great change in the composition of CSSA recipients. Before 1995, the majority of the recipients were elderly people. The elderly plus disabled persons accounted for over 80 percent of the recipients. Just a few of the recipients were unemployed persons and what we now call "single-parent families". In the last few years things have changed rapidly. The scheme now provides support for recipients with very diverse needs and problems.

The Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) will start by the end of this year. Even with the MPF, the CSSA spending in support of the aged poor would not decrease. I suppose about 10-15 percent of the elderly, now and in the future, will not have enough money to support themselves. For example, those just earning $ 4,000 would not have to make a contribution themselves although their employers have to make contribution for them. Those who are earning low wages, say between $ 6,000 to $ 7,000, and do not have a long enough time to make contributions to the MPF, will in the end call for CSSA. So I do not think our CSSA will disappear in the future. Even with the MPF, about 10-15 percent of the elderly will still be in need of assistance. So in publicizing the MPF, we have to be aware that MPF will not be a protection for all. The retirement protection system will comprise three components: one is MPF, one is CSSA, and the other is personal savings which will be an important component for most retirees. Do not think that once we have the MPF, we are going to do away the CSSA for the aged poor.

Changing Objectives

The CSSA started as a scheme to provide subsistence living for the non-working poor, and has evolved over the past 30 years into a complex system. It now provides support for recipients with diverse needs and problems. Specifically, the scheme provides basic pension for the aged poor, unemployment assistance for unemployed workers with insufficient means, income supplements for families earning low incomes, financial relief for single-parent families, and support for persons suffering from illness or disability. Although some people are still urging for an unemployment assistance scheme for all, I do not know whether the government will do it. I am not going to comment on this idea here, but the CSSA already provides assistance to the unemployed. The number of unemployed workers on CSSA increased very rapidly. As Mrs. Cartland just mentioned, we have seen a drop in the unemployed caseload last year. I think the unemployment part of the CSSA is going to stay to provide a safety net. There are economic ups and downs. Maybe in the next year or so, we will see an improvement in the unemployment rate. But somehow a society like Hong Kong will always have a certain number of people who for various reasons are unemployed and cannot support themselves. I think the CSSA is going to be there to help this group of people.

The CSSA provides income supplement for those families who are earning very low income. The point we have to watch is the gap between the rich and the poor in Hong Kong. There are a substantial number of workers who are not highly educated and have very low skills. They do not earn enough to support themselves and their families. They need support, not full support but at least partial support, from the CSSA scheme.

The CSSA provides financial help for single parent families. The number of single parent families receiving CSSA has also increased rapidly in the last few years. The number of cases is around 25,000 now. This is partly because of the increase in divorce rate, and partly because of a well-known social phenomenon. A sizable number of men from Hong Kong got married in Mainland China. Their children are here with them, while their wives are still in the Mainland. More and more of this kind of pseudo single-parent families are receiving CSSA. The father has to take care of two or three children, while his wife is in the Mainland. Very often, he is earning very low income or even unemployed. We all understand that there are many children and wives in the Mainland waiting to come to Hong Kong. It will take a few more years to change the situation. I think quite a number of these families will be in need of CSSA.

Other people who are in need of CSSA are those suffering from illness or disability. The scheme also serves as a last resort for all those requiring financial assistance.

A Complex System

All I want to say is that CSSA is no longer a simple scheme to provide a single safety net for all who are poor and unable to maintain a basic living standard. We must recognize the complexity of the existing CSSA as a measure to relieve poverty. The present administrative structure responsible for running CSSA is no longer effective in meeting the needs of the recipients nor adequate in rendering the help required.

I am not saying that those working in the social security field units are not efficient. They really have to work very hard especially in the past couple of years. They face a lot of difficulties in coping with the increasing caseload and the complexity of the scheme. I would like to point out two things related to administration. The first is the training of the social security officers who are now responsible for running the whole system. They are basically trained just to make the assessment because it is a means-tested scheme, and to treat all the applicants fairly as far as possible. In other wards, once meeting the requirements, the applicants are able to get the benefits as a matter of right. I think basically they are asked to do this. But when you look at the reasons why people are applying for CSSA, the officers are now dealing with all sorts of problems. It is not just simple financial assistance. When the unemployed come for assistance, their problem is not just short of money for basic living. They are unable to find jobs to match their skills. CSSA applicants have problems besides financial needs. The staff are asked to run the scheme, but they are not equipped with the skills to deal with the myriad problems of the applicants. The inadequate training affects the efficiency and the effectiveness of the scheme.

The scheme started as a simple one, but as I have mentioned, the situation has changed over the years. More and more discretionary items have been added to the scheme. I do not think every worker working in the field units can remember all the items. I have a chance to look at the manual and it is so thick. Sometimes the field workers might miss one or two, and sometimes they might not be able to judge whether an applicant is really eligible for a particular benefit or not. The scheme and the procedure are so complicated. The system is not simple to administer.

The other point is that recipients are poor for a number of reasons and financial assistance should form only a part of the efforts to help them live out of poverty. If you try to help them, you do not want to make them rely on CSSA forever. You have to understand why they have to apply for assistance. I want to stress that they do not merely need money. They have other problems to deal with. Cooperation with other organizations, both public and private, is required to help them in tackling their specific needs. In other words, if you want to do something to help the recipients, and not just give them money, it is not going to be an easy task at all.

Suggestions for Reform

My suggestions aim at making the system more tidy. The CSSA scheme should adopt a "categorical" approach by dividing the recipients into categories, each with its own scale rate, eligibility criteria, conditions for assistance and kinds of help offered. Field workers will then get a clearer idea of what to do with the applicants. The applicants will in turn have a better idea of their benefits.

The important thing is that each category has its own scale rate. This will avoid a lot of difficulties of the current system. We must understand that different people have different needs. We must recognize that some people do not merely need money. Each category of recipients must have its own scale rate and eligibility criteria. We must change the current system. I think we must be very clear in order to avoid any misunderstanding and misconception about the CSSA system.

I am not going to advocate drastic changes, but we have to make the system more efficient and more effective. I suggest the following categories:

1. Old Age Assistance

The financial needs of the elderly should be considered together with their needs for housing and health care. Elderly people do not just need money. Housing is important for them and health care is even more important. I have met a lot of elderly people living on the CSSA. No one told me that they did not have enough to eat. They were worried about health care when they became sick. This is why they have to save out of the money received from CSSA. So if we want to make the system more efficient in helping the elderly, the Social Welfare Department must work together with other departments responsible for housing and health care.

2. Unemployment Assistance

The unemployed recipients should be taken as a group. I do not think the Social Welfare Department is the best department to help the unemployed workers to go back to work. The field workers can assess the financial needs of the applicants, but are not well suited to find jobs for them. The Labour Department must play a role in getting the unemployed CSSA recipients back to work.

3. Families with Dependent Children Assistance

Social workers should be involved in helping these families. We know that single parent families need more than financial assistance. Their need for family services is also very great. We have to cater for the special needs of the children.

4. Sickness and Disablement Assistance

The task of rehabilitating the sick and the disabled is more important than just giving them financial support.

Concluding Remarks

A categorical approach will make the CSSA more effective. Applicants will know exactly what to expect from the system, and the field workers will know what kind of assistance to provide. We want to get an unemployed CSSA recipient back to work as quickly as possible, but we would not expect an elderly recipient to go out and search for a job.

It is time to revamp the entire CSSA scheme to make it more a measure to help the poor to help themselves. We must go beyond the objective to "assist the vulnerable members of the society with financial or material assistance", as stated in the 1991 White Paper on social welfare. We must try to achieve more by dealing with the reasons why they are on CSSA, instead of just giving them financial and material support.

By Nelson Chow Wing Sun