17-AUG-1992 16:45
PAUL FIFOOT
To: NIGEL COX
FAX TRANSMISSION
0372723755
P.01/02
499
pl cc
Saw Stone
Hong Kong Department, FCO HKA 233/1
Fax No.: 071 270 3387
Pages, including this page: 2.
From: PAUL FIFOOT
Fax No.: 0372 723 755
Tel No. (0372) 723 755
Date: 17th August 1992
HMOCS: OPTIONS PAPER AND DRAFT LETTER
м
1. I have now read your commentary dated 27th July 1992 on the Options Paper and the draft of the letter you propose dated 30th July. I have very few comments. They are as follows:
COMMENTARY ON OPTIONS PAPER
386
I. A. Option A: Introductory para, line 2: the arrangements were provided for HMOCS and others; see my minute of 11th June to yourself and my minute of todays date to Mr Stone. But you may not wish to make the point here! KA 233/5 (39)
Option A (c), line 12: Is 42 a reference to POAS or to agreements under the 1973 Overseas Pensions Act ? If the latter, have we taken over pensions in 42 Dependent Territories ? I do not know, but ODA should. Should we not make the point that in how ever many there were, we did not stop at providing a safeguard which might or might not be called in, but actually took over responsibility for the pensions ?
Option B, line 4: 'on or about' the change in sovereignty was the traditional date for the appointed day in POAs, but in present circumstances something much nearer the present is required.
Clearly different dates fui different officers would produce anomalies and no doubt complicate the
administration.
Option C (b): I agree with (h) hue T question (c); some officers might well think it a worthwhile price for insurance.
Option D: 42 cases again. Is this intended to be a reference to POAS or to agreements under the Overseas Pensions Act 1973, and its predecessor ? If the former, we required the oversea territory to safeguard the whole pension and if the latter we took responsibility for the whole pension. But the pension in payment may have been reduced by commutation, and even if the Treasury admit they could hardly seek to underwrite only the non- commutable part, is it not worth pointing out that if a part of the pension is commuted it will reduce
quite
No
222221
We know
DN
1