From The Minister of State
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London SW1A 2AH
9 August 1988
ka. Lovis Grey.
I am now
In my letter of 10 June I said I would let you have a substantive reply to your letter of 6 June. able to do so.
You raise a number of points about the draft Basic Law and the payment of pensions. Article 101 of the draft Basic Law repeats in full the provisions of Section V of Annex I to the Sino-British Joint Declaration in respect of the pay and pensions of officers in the public service in Hong Kong. Those provisions are clear and unambiguous.
I do not share your view that Articles 105 and 107 of the draft Basic Law override the provisions of Article 101. Were those Articles to be retained, it would be necessary for them to be applied having regard to the assurance constituted by Article 101 (and Article 93, which concerns similar arrangements for pensions for judges and other members of the judiciary). But, as will have been clear from my remarks in the Lords debate on 10 June, and from Geoffrey Howe's in the Commons debate on 15 July, the British Government sees some force in the argument that Articles 105 and 107 are inappropriate in a
I hope constitutional document such as the Basic Law. that the Chinese Government will take account of the widespread criticism of them when they come to revise the draft later this year.
The Lord Grey of Naunton GMCG GCVO OBE President
Overseas Pensioners' Association
63 Church Road
Hove
Sussex BN3 2BD
/You
Page 45Page 46