CONFIDENTIAL
he has not responded at 'all
The
have Treamry vetoed that, argwing that
it prejudger minuterial Jeulimi on
a
F
Safeguard. The revived spealtain
note is in
your brief
P.
The verbatim record of the consultations should reach us
soon.
2.
Unless Mr Portillo responds favourably in the next
couple of days on the principle of sterling safeguards for pensions, the Minister of State will be unable to give any substantive news to the HMOCS representatives. However, on procedure, I think that he could agree to their request that, rather than proceeding piecemeal, we should not take
our benefits proposal any further until we have taken a
provisional view on sterling safeguards, and that we should
then arrange further consultations with the Association
about the totality of arrangements to be made for HMOCS
officers. This, coupled with Hong Kong's decision to extend the deadline for opting for the new pension scheme from 30
June to 31 December, might take some heat out of the situation without significantly limiting Ministers' options. We are seeking to clear with the Treasury the attached draft points to make.
3.
We shall aim to submit an options paper to the Minister after his return from Hong Kong. This might serve as a basis for the discussion which Lady Chalker has proposed
with Mr Patten, Mr Goodlad and officials. (It is for consideration whether a Treasury Minister might be invited to such a meeting.) Meanwhile I would summarize the
present position on the three main HMOCS aspirations as
follows:
(a) Compensation: We told the Treasury that we expected the cost of our benefits proposal to be between £20-30 million,
spread over 8 years from 1997, with a maximum of about £39
million, and a minimum of about £4 million. We are now
looking at ways in which the proposal could be re-cast within the £39 million envelope, so that all officers who
BE1AAA/2
CONFIDENTIAL