STAFF IN CONFIDENCE
48
STAFFING THE DEPENDENT TERRITORIES IN THE 1980s:
COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM GOVERNORS
1. A theme that recurs in several letters (notably those from Messrs Jones (Montserrat), Russell (Caymans), Wallace (BVI), Le Breton (Anguilla) and Sir Bruce Greatbatch (DevDiv Caribbean) is that DS officers appointed to the Dependent Territories lack the instinct and knowledge of how the machine works which a Governor or Chief Secretary requires. Sir Bruce Greatbatch and Mr Le Breton emphasize that Governors are responsible for doing, diplomats for observing.
2. Several suggestions are made as to how to overcome this lack of relevant experience among DS officers and how to solve the shortage of suitable officers, DS or HMOCS. Mr Russell (Caymans) advocates retaining HMOCS officers to age 60 and reintroducing 5-year tours. Mr Guy (St Helena) suggests retaining some HMOCS officers to age 65 to fill DT desks in the FCO; he also suggests the recruitment of ex-Forces officers or commercial people (from companies such as Cable & Wireless or United Africa Co). Sir Bruce Greatbatch advocates using ODM officers with colonial experience and agrees that HMOCS officers should be allowed to continue to 60. Both Mr Watson (Turks and Caicos) and Mr Le Breton question the suggestion that experience as a District Officer may not be very relevant to posts in the central administration of Dependent Territories. Mr Watson favours the posting of officers at First Secretary level to DTs to gain
experience. Mr Russell (Caymans) suggests the creation of a post of "Inspector General" to be filled by a senior experienced colonial administrator someone of the calibre of Sir David Trench or
-
Sir Michael Gass. The holder of this post would tour Dependent Territories with the dual purpose of providing advice to DS Officers who lacked colonial experience and reporting back to the FCO in the same way as the DS Inspectorate.
3. Mr Bridge (Secretary for the Civil Service, Hong Kong) questions the belief that the high emoluments of Hong Kong officials would make it difficult to second them for service in other territories without expensive topping-up. He points out that officers aged about 50 could retire on pension from Hong Kong to take jobs in other territories without being worse off at the end of the day. Moreover, such mature officers might be better suited to the posts concerned than younger ones. But Mr Bridge also suggests that experience in a UK local authority might be more directly relevant than experience in Hong Kong. Mr Jones and Mr Wallace also queried whether Hong Kong officers would necessarily have suitable experience. Advantage is seen however by Mr Russell and Mr Guy in Hong Kong officers serving tours in the FCO in order to give them broader experience of Dependent Territories work.
STAFF IN CONFIDENCE