In the debate on 19 February my noble friend Lord Gridley made
specific reference to the position of members of Her Majesty's
Overseas Civil Service in Hong Kong, and asked that a binding
agreement, such as a public officers' agreement, be provided for them between now and 1997. While the provisions of the agreement in
relation to pay and pension apply to members of HMOCS in Hong Kong
as much as they do to other civil servants, I take this opportunity
to reiterate the response I gave my noble friend on 19 February
that the Government recognises the particular concerns of HMOCS
officers in Hong Kong, and will continue to keep their interests in
mind in the 12 years leading up to 1997, including the question of a
public officers' agreement. I do not rule out a public officers'
agreement in due course: such an agreement may prove to be the best
means of laying down the provisions to be applied to HMOCS in Hong
Kong in respect of benefits payable after 1997. It is equally
possible that in the unique circumstances of Hong Kong there may
prove to be
be other ways of achieving these ends. In due course there
will need to be discussions with the Hong Kong Government on this
subject. But I would sound one note of caution. If we wish to make arrangements which will be truly durable, and thus provide a real
reassurance for HMOCS in Hong Kong, we should not make them precipitately or without full consultation and discussion of the
issues.
is
As I have said, the Government is firmly of the view that in current
circumstances the pensions and benefits of the Hong Kong Civil
Service, including members of HMOCS in Hong Kong, are not a subject
upon which there
a need to legislate in the
the manner proposed in
amendment before the House. I hope that the assurances I have given on the future position of the public service in Hong Kong will
satisfy my whole friend and the House as a whole, and that the
noble Lord will not press his amendment.
the
CONFIDENTIAL