TO:
3387
1+1 pages
BY FAX: 071 270
NIGEL WHITNEY
HKD/FCO
LONDON
FROM: ALAN N MCDONALD
OPD/ODA
AH 527
EAST KILBRIDE
GTN TEL NO: 7243
H
3576
GTN FAX NO: 7243
4099
Dear Nigel
HỒNG KONG: STERLING SAFEGUARDS
r
cc Paul Fifast
Cc
HLiA 233/1
JAN 1994
Рать
в
4/4
I last wrote to you on the subject of Sterling Safeguarde on August. Since then I have been giving some further thought to the provisions of the Scheme in order to make it more presentable to both the Treasury and the Hong Kong Association.
2. In paragraph 38 of my earlier minute I warned you that we might have some difficulty in the apportionment of SPOS in mixed service pension cases, ie for the purposes of identifying the level of SPOS appropriate to the
the Hong Kong pension for the proposed Sterling Safeguard Scheme. I pleased to say that we have managed to come up with a formula (which will be incorporated in the consolidated SPOS Regs from 1 July 1994) which will not require any change to the substance of
the substance of the Sterling Safeguard Scheme. Thats the good news.
3. The bad news is that we need to give some thought to the pensioners who should be covered by the Sterling Safeguard Scheme. As presently drafted, the Scheme only covers officers, former officers and the dependents of such officers who were members of HMOCS. What about the pensions of those officers who were in and out of Hong Kong service before 1 October 1954 (the date for the establishment of HMOCS); or indeed the pensions of those officers who were recruited by the Crown Agents or happened to occupy a "normal channel post" and who were in and out of Hong Kong service before 26 November 1956 (the date on which this group became members HMOCS)? Clearly we need to protect these pensions. I can let Paul Fifcot have a copy of the various Colonial Office circulars covering the amendments to the "Special Regulations" if he needs them.
4. Needless-to-say we shall have to be very careful with the wording of the amendment to Paragraph 2 (a) of our Scheme otherwise we could inadvertently give others, particularly those officers occupying "normal channel posts" after 1956 (but who did not apply for membership of HMOCS), protected pensions. An element of discretion is therefore needed. Perhaps we can discuss before Paul puts pen to paper.
313
TOOd 168*ON
PE FT £6/01/IT