04-SEP-1992 16:56
PAUL FIFOOT
To: NIGEL COX
0372723755
P.01/02
FAX TRANSMISSION
Cc Mr Cox
Mr Stone or me
file
Qu
7/9
Hong Kong Department, FCO
Fax No.: 071 270 3387
Pages, including this page: 2
From: PAUL FIFOOT
Fax No.: 0372 723755
Tel No.: (0372) 723755
Date: 4th September 1992
HMOCS: POSTS IN OTHER TERRITORIES
1. The 1954 and 1960 White Papers provide as follows:
"They [members of HMOCS] shall continue to be regarded by Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom as members of Her Majesty's service and as such to be eligible for consideration for transfer or promotion to any posts which the Secretary of State may be requested to fill in other territories" (paragraph 6(3) of Colonial 306);
"Officers who retire from Her Majesty's Overseas Civil Service may be considered for re-employment on contract in other Colonial territories. Those who wish to be considered for such vacancies may apply to the Colonial Office. Most vacancies are in basic grades and appointments are normally made for one tour in the first instance but some longer ter appointments may be available in certain territories."
(paragraph 23 of Cmnd 1193).
I do not think that these statements are affected by the decision that members of HMOCS from Hong Kong who continue in the service of the SAR will not be considered as continuing as members of HMOCS. Nor does "normally" in the second, exclude legitimate aspirations to more senior posts; it did not in the past.
2. There is nothing in these passages which provides a basis for a claim to prior consideration by officers to whom the White Papers apply. Nor does the historical argument carry much weight.
After the introduction of the 1954
White Paper and the independence of certain territories, there remained HMOCS officers in other territories who were considered for transfer and promotion at least equally with HMOCS officers displaced from former colonies. Members of the Diplomatic Service (some Governors came from the Colonial Office not the Colonial Service) and contract officers (and the occasional politician) have largely replaced pensionable HMOCS officers in territories other than Hong Kong, and the FCO, as successor to the Colonial Office, have had to make provision for the staffing of those other Lerritories even if (because they did not offer comparable terms) there were no candidates from Hong Kong. That may continue to be the case; it is quite proper for the FCO to make provision for a cadre from which dependent
1