102
required to resign his Home post in order to
do so.
7. Mr. Winch's statement that the Government
of Hong Kong has by immediately employing him
}
upon police duties, recognised his previous police
service is not quite correct. The fact is that
the duties he was employed on, on his arrival
in Hong Kong, were those which he had undertaken
to perform under the contract he signed in the
United Kingdom.
8. In point (6) of his letter Mr. Winch refers
to the position of members of the Palestine
Police Force who have been absorbed into the
Metropolitan and other Police Forces. He appears
to misunderstand the situation, which is that the
Palestine Police officers who have been, or are to
be, so absorbed in the Home Police Forces have not
had their previous service taken into account for
purposes of rank or pension. All that has been done
is to take their previous service into account for
purposes of determining the point of entry into
the Metropolitan Police pay scale. It is, I think,
pertinent to remark here that on this point there
can be no comparison between the two cases, since
the Palestine Police personnel concerned are
redundant on account of the withdrawal from
Palestine, whereas the writer voluntarily left his
Home police appointment to take up Colonial
employment.
q His apprehensions regarding the retiring
•
age are not fully understood but they probably arise
from