59
521256/21
Go 25461/23
40
Objects and Reasons.
1. This Ordinance deals with a number of proposed amendments to the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Ordi- nance which have been collecting for some time.
2. Though there is no longer any widows' and orphans' pension fund, certain reference to a fund are being allowed to remain in the principal Ordinance. The reason for this is obvious throughout the title and preamble. The word is being allowed to remain in section 3 (4) (d) because it was used in Ordinance No. 5 of 1921. It is being allowed to remain in section 2 (b), partly because of section 3 (4) (d) and partly because it did not seem worth while to amend section 2.
3. The effect of section 3 will be to exclude from the widows' and orphans' pension scheme all Indian members of the staff of the Prisons Department. This is believed to be in accordance with the wishes of the present Indian members of the Prisons Department. In 1921 an amend- ing Ordinance enabled the Indian prison officers whose salaries were less than $120 a year to choose whether they would continue to contribute to the scheme or not and without exception they elected not to contribute. Indian prison officers who are now contributing are given by section 19 of this Ordinance the option of continuing to contribute. Any such officer who elects not to contri- bute will be allowed to withdraw on the usual terms, i.e., he will get back one half of his total contributions without nterest.
4. For many years the widows' and orphans' fund, and the succeeding widows' and orphans' pension scheme, were confined to persons permanently employed in the service of the Goverument and to certain members of the police force. In 1921 the scheme was extended to persons appointed on agreement for any period exceeding two years. This caused various difficulties and it is now proposed to revert to the original rule and to confine the scheme to officers on the permanent staff. This is effected by the repeal of section 3 (1) (c) of the principal Ordinance. It will be noticed that in that paragraph as printed in the present edition of the Ordinances "not exceeding two years is a misprint for "exceeding two years". Certain members of the police force have always been included specifically because, though they in fact serve on agreement for successive terms of five years, they are substantially permanent officers. They are dealt with in section 3 (1) (5) of the principal Ordinance. Subordinate officers of the Prisous Department have another peculiar system of engagement. They are engaged in the first instance on one year's probation. If they prove satisfactory they are taken on for a five years period which runs from the commencement of their year's pro- bation. If they still prove satisfactory they are taken on the permanent establishment. As explained above the Indian prisons officers are being excluded from the Ordi- nance. The proposed new sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph (1) of section 3 of the principal Ordinance includes in the definition of the term "officer" all Europeau prisons officers except officers on probation. It should be noted that such officers should not begin to contribute until the comple- tion of the period of probation, whether that be the original period contemplated of one year or an extended period. This is in accordance with the present practice.
5. Sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 1 of section 3 of the principal Ordinance is by section 5 to be made general, so as to include any persons who exercise an option under the present Ordinance,
6. Paragraph (2) of section 3 of the principal Ordinance is amended so as to give the Governor in Council power to exclude from the Ordinance any officer transferred to the Hong Kong service who is contributing in some other British possession or in some British protectorate. Section 12 of the principal Ordinance gives an officer who is transferred from the Hong Kong service the option of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.