72pc of workers doubt MPF will fund their retirement as universal pension debate reignites

This article is a rewrite of a report from July 2012.

A June 2012 telephone survey of 1,032 adults by a retirement-protection campaign coalition and a university social policy research centre found 72 per cent of working respondents had “no confidence” or “very little confidence” that MPF and savings would cover their retirement needs — including 47.8 per cent of those earning over HK$30,000 a month. More than 85 per cent saw elderly poverty as serious or very serious.

Was the proposed HK$2,200 allowance enough?

Sixty-five per cent of respondents said the HK$2,200 means-tested “special Old Age Allowance” proposed in the chief executive’s election platform was insufficient, and 72 per cent opposed any asset test. Seventy per cent felt removing means testing would give seniors basic retirement security. Seniors in hardship could apply for CSSA, but only after passing income and asset tests — and getting children to sign a “declaration of non-maintenance”.

An adviser to the coalition argued means testing wasted administrative resources, stigmatised applicants and created unfairness: saving while young could disqualify you from support when old, discouraging saving altogether. A coalition officer said the allowance was only transitional — the long-term goal should be a universal pension with no means test, handled by a dedicated department with public consultation.

Notably, even higher earners lacked confidence — the problem was not individual thrift but a system that gave people too little sense of security.