remainder of the transition period, and reiterates
palliative assurances which have been given to individual
members of HMOCS by the FCO since 1984.
4.
In these circumstances, we must caution that it
is becoming extremely difficult to take this matter
forward in the low-key manner we discussed earlier with
Keith Shipley. After nearly eight years of being told
that our serious concerns are being considered, noted or
whatever, the bland assurances given in response to our
letter of 9 May 1991 merely reinforce a view that this
matter can only be brought to a conclusion by raising it
in the public and political arena.
5.
Nobody should have any doubts that the ability,
determination and resources are available to effectively
promote the concerns of HMOCS Members in Hong Kong-
Nobody should underestimate the extent to which HMOCS
Members are disheartened, and disillusioned by the extent
to which HMG appears reluctant to acknowledge and honour
its obligations to us.
6.
We have asked for a substantive reply to our
letter of 9 May 1991. If you can assure us that we shall
receive a reply within a reasonable and definite period,
that would be helpful, and go a long way towards calming