CONFIDENTIAL
on the 19th or immediately thereafter, since we do
not have the papes.
3.
Similarly you could not safely either tell
Hunt privately or announce publicly that you had
decided to recommend to me that he should be
It may be only a thematical problem but it
EVIDENCE WE
retired without pension. If I decided in the end at were decided
on the evidence me conld not justify
the withholding could not surport you, we would be faced
that
Jentify
with the same problems for our relationship as
in the Tsoi case.
4. On the other hand, if, as seems probable,
your minimum requirement is to be able to say
you have decided that
must go, then there
halday of a pension (c.) para 5
of my
tel No 1000) [FLAGE]
may be no need to decide now whether Regulation
55 is appropriate. I can agree now, from all
the facts surrounding the case, that
stro his seprice should therefore
be terminated, it not under regulation 55 then under resulation 54.
retention in the public service, is no longer in
and that intentand the public interest, It should therefore be
possible for you to carry out the 49th the
precedures which we have agreed are appropriate,
for retirement under Section 59, including
Hunt grounde for his retirement as suggested in
paragraph 5 of my telegram No 1000, and giving
him the opportunity to reply. It might be est
well also to put
iving This should make it
possible for you
questions outlined
in your telegram, that if we finally decided
t
to announce onth. Has to 19th, if
Flee you think it
night, that, with
my agreement,
You are
taking
to zot undox Regulation 55, he could not complaing the necessary steps
that the whole basis
changed. You could then announce that, with my
his retirement was being
greement, you had decided that Hunt should
Fonger continue in the public service. If
asks whether he will get a pension, you could
for him to leave
the service.
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
(10382) Dd.3920059154m){(77 sorts) 1/68 G.W.B.Ltd.Gp.863
/say