讨论逾20年、历经三届政府不懈努力，取消强积金对冲安排终于走完“最后一里路”。立法会昨日三读通过《2022年僱佣及退休计划法例（抵销安排）条例草案》，这是完善强积金制度的关键举措，也是保障劳工权利的重要里程碑。取消对冲最快于2025年落实，本港的退休保障制度有待进一步完善，未来的挑战不会少，但只要特区政府积极作为，劳资双方互谅互让，就一定能创造双赢方案。

　　为了解决打工仔的后顾之虑，特区政府于2001年落实强积金计划，这是一个巨大的进步。但可惜的是，当年政府为争取商界支持作出重大让步，容许雇主在雇员退休或离职时，以部分强积金对冲长期服务金及遣散费。这一特殊安排，令雇主得以名正言顺地回避了《僱佣条例》下雇主的应有责任，削弱了对打工仔的退休保障，多年来，被对冲的强积金高达500亿元。对冲机制因此成为劳资博弈的焦点，上届特区政府承诺逐步取消对冲机制，本届政府将取消对冲写入施政报告，经过各方折冲樽俎，终于在昨日兑现了承诺。

　　立法会以72票支持、5票反对、12票弃权通过法案，显示取消对冲得到主流民意的支持，但仍有反对声音。事实上，即使在立法会审议法案的最后阶段，具商界背景的部分立法会议员仍然试图“力挽狂澜”，反对的理由不外乎“加重商界负担”、助长打工仔“博炒”等。其实，这些观点多年来不断重复，并无新意，也是站不住脚的。

　　正如政府官员及立会议员指出，人工占香港营商成本的三分之一，强积金雇主部分只占营商成本的0.38%，取消对冲谈不上对商界构成很重的负担，何况相当一部分成本已由特区政府主动承担；疫情下经济下行，失业率升高，打工仔保住工作已是幸运，所谓“博炒”不知从何谈起，事实上，取消对冲安排只是回到2000年前的状况，那时并无“博炒”问题。再说经济有起有跌，过去如此，未来亦如此，何谓“最佳时机”并无客观标准，如果一直等待下去，取消对冲安排就会无了期地拖下去，有关争议何时才能了结？

　　该做的事情就要做，不能找借口拖延。当社会对解决争议有了基本共识，便是通过落实的最佳时机。取消对冲安排不会挑起劳资矛盾，相反，有利于提升打工仔的工作积极性，有利于巩固对企业的忠诚，有利于社会和谐，长远而言对资方也有利。

　　值得一提的是，香港走到取消对冲这一步，端赖社会各界锲而不舍的坚持，劳资双方互谅互让，特区政府在推动法案上也扮演了重要角色，这体现在特区政府聆听及重视商界意见，有商有量，不断优化政府资助方案。有关资助金额由当初的79亿元增至现在的332亿元，资助年限则由10年延长至25年，作出了相当大的承担，回应了商界的主要关切，为立法会最终通过有关安排扫除了障碍。

　　强积金制度是退休保障的重要一环，对冲机制本来就不公平、不合理，如今将之取消属于亡羊补牢，也是特区政府应有的责任。当然，完善相关制度仍然还有很多工作要做，包括解决强积金行政费过高、回报率未如人意，以及提升保障额度等问题。有关部门应多走一步，多想几招，团结各界以同建关爱共融社会。

　　2022-06-10

With offsetting mechanism scraped to embrace social inclusion, retirement protection should be further improved

　　The arrangement to scrap the offsetting mechanism under the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) has eventual walked through the "final one mile", after 20 years of debate and sustained effort of three successive governments. The Legislative Council (Legco) yesterday passed through third reading the Employment and Retirement Schemes Legislation (Offsetting Arrangement) (Amendment) Bill 2022. This is a crucial measure to improve the MPF scheme and also an important milestone in protection of labour rights. The offsetting mechanism is to be scraped from 2025 the soonest while Hong Kong's retirement protection system has yet to be further improved. More challenges are to be expected in future. A win-win scheme is bound to be created, however, as long as the SAR Government acts proactively and enterprisingly and both employees and employers stick to the spirit of mutual understanding and accommodation

　　To alleviate workers' worry about life after retirement, the SAR Government introduced the MPF scheme in 2001 which was an enormous progress. But, regrettably, in order to win support from the business sector, the then government had made a major concession allowing employers to offset statutory long service payment (LSP) and severance payment (SP) against employees' MPF benefits derived from employers' MPF contributions. This special arrangement enables employers to justifiably sidestep their due responsibility under the Employment Ordinance and weakens retirement protection for employees. In the past years, the amount of MPF used for this purpose totals as high as $50 billion. The offsetting mechanism thus has become a focus of controversy between employees and employers. The previous-term government made a promise to gradually abolish the offsetting mechanism and the current-term government wrote it into the Policy Address (2021). The promise was eventually honoured yesterday after manoeuvres and negotiations among various sectors.

　　The bill was passes at Legco, supported by 72 members while five voted against and 12 abstained. This shows scraping the offsetting mechanism is supported by the mainstream of public opinions while there are still some dissenting voices. In fact, even at the final stage of deliberating the bill at the Legco, some lawmakers with business background still made an effort trying to "turn the tide", but their reasons for objection are nothing more than "increasing employers' burden" or "encouraging employees to seek dismissal [for job-hopping]". In fact, having been repeated over and over again in the past years, such opinions express nothing new and don't hold water.

　　As pointed out by government officials and Legco members, salaries account for one third of business operational costs in Hong Kong and employers' contribution to MPF only accounts for 0.38 per cent of business operational costs. Hence it is out of the question that abolishing the offsetting mechanism would increase employers' financial burden, not to mention a considerable part of the cost is compensated by the government on its own initiative. Amid the Covid-19 epidemic, the economy is going down and unemployment rate going up. It is lucky for a worker to keep their job. How would one want to deliberately seek dismissal? As a matter of fact, with the offsetting mechanism abolished, the state of affairs simply returns to that before 2000, and at that time there was no question of seeking dismissal. The economy goes up and down. This was so in the past and will be so in future. So there is no objective standard for "the best timing". If we kept waiting and waiting, abolishing the offsetting mechanism would have been held off indefinitely. When could the controversy have been put to an end, then?

　　What has to be done must be done, which must not be held off by making excuses. The best timing for implementation is when some basic consensus is formed in society to solve the controversy. Abolishing the offsetting mechanism won't instigate employee-employer conflict. On the contrary, it will help whip up employees' work enthusiasm and consolidate their loyalty to enterprises, be beneficial to social harmony and also to employers in the long term.

　　It is noteworthy that, it is by relying on various social sectors' perseverance and mutual understanding and accommodation between employees and employers that Hong Kong could eventually work out to scrape the offsetting mechanism. The SAR Government has also played an important role in pushing forward the bill. This could be seen in the facts that the SAR Government had listened to and paid attention to opinions from the business sector, willing to give and take and keep optimising the government subsidy scheme. The amount of subsidy now increases to $33.2 billion from the originally-proposed $7.9 billion, and the subsidy scheme is extended to 25 year from 10. As such, the government has made a considerable commitment in response to major concerns of the business sectors, paving the way for the Legco to pass the bill in the end.

　　The MPF scheme is an important link in retirement protection. The offsetting mechanism is unfair and unreasonable in the first place. It is better late than never to abolish it now, which is also a due responsibility of the SAR Government. Needless to say, there are still a lot to be done to improve the scheme concerned, including solving the problems of high administrative fees, unsatisfactory rate of return, and increasing the amount of benefit. Authorities concerned should move forward a step farther and conceive of more moves, so as to unite all sectors to jointly build a caring and inclusive society.

　　10 June 2022