Download Social Welfare Developments in Hong Kong - Social Welfare Systems and Social Policy - Lecture Notes and more Study notes Social Welfare in PDF only on Docsity!
Social Welfare Developments in Hong Kong
The social welfare developments (the wider concept of social welfare, which includes housing, health care, education, and social care) in Hong Kong reflects very much the overall economic, political development and socio-cultural changes of society. In this lecture, we will discuss the major mile-stones of the social welfare development in Hong Kong with a special focus on the development of social welfare services (social care). Roughly speaking, the social welfare developments can be classified into 5 phases.
Phases of Development
Phase 1: Colonial System and Minimal Policy (1842-1952) or The Golden Age of Voluntarism (1945-1965)
1907 – Hong Kong College of Medicine which 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 released a memorandum entitle ‘Social Welfare in the Colonies’ which viewed welfare as being crucial to social development. HK population surged after 1945 to 1.6million, living in very poor conditions. HK government did very little, not because of financial reason, but because 1) fear/uncertain of its future - should HK be returned back to China, 2) population was perceived as mobile and transient. 1947/48 – Establishment of Social Welfare Office (SWO) under the Secretary of Chinese Affairs (華民政務司)- primary role to liaise with voluntary welfare agencies to encourage the Chinese to look after themselves.
1948 – Housing Society low interest government loans were made available to middle-income families
Phase 2 Partial Social Policy (1953-70)
1952 Christmas Shek Kei Mei squatter fire
1958 The setting up of 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 – the aim of social welfare was the promotion of independent living, importance of ‘positive rehabilitation as opposed to the establishment of the soup kitchen’, preserve, support and reinforce the family. Family counseling and casework service – to bolstered family in order to carry out its welfare functions 1.
(^1) All the four social welfare white papers can be obtained from
http://www.swik.org.hk/SWIKPortal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabIndex=3&tabid=61&StructID=
- Expenditure was to be met by economic growth, not through new taxes
- No contributory scheme
- Not social rights (basic parameters – young population, full-employment)
Phase 3 The ‘Big Bang’ Social Policy, 1971- Such changes were the result of many factors: dramatic or critical events, extraordinary political leadership, the rise of new political elites, and the accumulated impact of ideas via the mass media (Wilson, 1977 on the sudden changes in Hong Kong welfare policies cited in Tang, 1998, p.61).
Legitimacy of the government was shattered by the 1966 and 67 Riots. Social security started in early 1970s with the introduction of a public assistance scheme, followed by old age and disability allowances.
1972 Universal free primary education
1973 - A While Paper on Social Welfare in Hong Kong: The Way Ahead – followed by the First Five Year Plan (reviewed annually by Social Welfare Advisory Committee). (74-75 welfare expenditure has greatly increased to 212.5 million, 65% more than the previous year).
1973 – New Housing Authority was set up (amalgamated the functions of the previously separate housing bodies – 10 years housing programme for 1.5 million. Housing for the needy? (squatter areas redevelopment in order to acquire land?) Building new towns for the public housing led to massive government infrastructure programmes.
1973 – Revised medical and health services (10 years plan launched in 1964 was near completion – new hospitals, more medical staff, more specialized units, and better and more sophisticated equipment)
1977 – Personal social work – school social work, outreaching, family life education and services for the disabled.
4 major areas of development: 1) public assistance, 2) help/service for the vulnerable, 3)facilities for the disabled, 4)expansion of social and recreational facilities.
1978 - HOS (Home Ownership Scheme)
1978 - 9 Years free and compulsory education
Phase 4 Incremental Social Policy, 1978 to 1997 Generally, more conservative (Planning philosophy of disjointed incrementalism in public policy (Camhis, 1979 cited in Tang, 1998)
Incrementalism is a planning approach that mainly involves moderate changes on the existing policy without too much concern about its aims. Planners need only to agree on policies instead of their objectives – this is also referred to as the science of
Increased and diversified expectation of the public to the government Historical/political events (Financial crisis, SARS, problem with the housing policy) Political structure/ political process (although HK does not have a true democracy in the Western definition, the channels for influencing government decisions are actively employed by political groups of various spectrum. Younger generation has different expectations towards the government – the rise of new social movements especially on cultural, environmental and identity issues. Activists on traditional welfare issues weakened.
What accounts for welfare in Hong Kong? Colonial legacy – migrants, sense of belonging, uncertain future, geo-political status of Hong Kong Status of HK as an outlet to the outside world was confirmed in the Korean War (1950). Hong Kong had a strong strategic importance to British Empire in Asia, and was considered as a fortress to resist communism during the cold war period.
“We have to ensure good government in fortress Colonies vital to the defense of the free world… I have in mind Hong Kong, Singapore, Aden (a city in Yemen), Kenya, Cyprus, Malta and Gibraltar… Hong Kong … made an astonishing recovery after the war… she bought since the war 300 million worth of goods from the U.K, nearly three times as much as she has sold us.” (Alan Lennox-Boyd, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, 9 October, 1958 cited in Tang, 1998, p. 58)
Hodge (1973) identified an internal logic in the order of development of social services in the British colonies. 1) education to produce a cadre of local assistants for the colonial government, traders and the missions, 2) basic health services to help relieve sickness among colonial administrators, 3) labor legislation, 4) social welfare and the responsibility for 5) penal administration.
Political doctrine – Laissez faire, neo-liberalism, positive non-interventionism, small government, big society
The argument of the colonial government was that economic development and full employment is the most important means to guarantee welfare of the citizens. The government’s role is to put sound economic policy in place (with as little intervention of the market operation as possible – laissez faire approach, or Sir Haddon-cave’s positive non-interventionism). Besides, the promotion of family values in conjuncture with the Confucianism (unfortunately, we know very little about what it is and many equate this with version described by Lee Kwuan Yew.). Thus, tax rates must be kept at a low level, in order to attract foreign investment and to create jobs for the unskilled workers who were in plentiful supply.
Economic affairs are conducted in an environment of virtually unfettered for enterprise. Government policy has long dictated a virtually hands-off approach towards the private sector, an approach that seems well-suited to Hong Kong’s exposed and dependent economic and political situation. The philosophy that underlies government in Hong Kong can be summed up in a few short phrases: law
and order , minimum interference in private affairs, and the creation of an environment conducive to profitable investment. Regulatory economic controls are held to a minimum, no restrictions are placed on the movement of capital, little protection and few subsides are given to industry, and the few direct services provided by the government are operated on a commercial basis (Rabushka, 1979, p.44 cited in McLaughlin, 1993, p.107).
Cultural factors or persuasion? Lee Kuan Yew, the then prime minister of Singapore, made it very clear to his citizens that “Singapore must eschew^3 one of the characteristics of the Welfare State syndrome, where everyone expects others, not himself, to work hard to carry the subsidies for services everyone wants” (Singapore Government, 1973, p.25)^4.
When the Hong Kong government published its first White Paper on social welfare in 1965, it was even argued that too much social welfare would erode the traditional functions of the family (Hong Kong Government, 1965).
Political realities and rising expectations Weak and scattered political oppositions in post war period (the split between pro-Beijing and pro-Taipei forces) in the early post war period.
1966/67 political turmoil Legitimacy of the government was shattered by the 1966 and 67 Riots. A consultant of the government pointed out that ineffective communication, poor living/working conditions and lack of social services were the major reasons.
1971 Sir Murray MacLehose argued that the future stability and prosperity of Hong Kong would be built on ‘four pillars’ of social policy, namely public housing, education, medical and health care and social services – but funded not by raising tax but by the state of HK economy.
Prosperity and de-colonization/democratization One of the explanations for this expansion of social welfare in the 1980s and 1990s is based on the fact that, as surpluses accumulated with increasing revenues, there were simply no more excuses for government not to be more generous with the people. The development of representative local government from the mid-1980s, coupled with the rising expectations that go together with an enlarging middle class, were forces contributing to a gradual move towards universal social welfare (Wong et al. 2002).
“Instead of calming down social protest, the government’s reform programme stimulated demand, fostered community organizations, and politically enfranchised the residents at the local level. This done, violent protest receded, but it was exchanged for a greater say by the people in the running of local affairs (Castells et al., 1990, p. 150 cited in McLaughlin, 1993)
Business elites in fear of the politicization of welfare in the wake of the democratization process – “we are all aware of demagogues and their gospel of “free
(^3) Keep away from (^4) Singapore Government (1973), Singapore’73 , Singapore: Government Printer.
