TNAG-0205-FCO40-241-Pensions-policy-1970 — Page 82

CONFIDENTIAL

Reference..

Mr. O'Brien

(Financial Policy and Aid Department)

R

कर

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY No.51 14 NOV 1969

2KK 18/35 खाराम

2.

Pension Policy

Please refer to your minute of 5 November.

I regret that we were unable to send you our comments by 7 November, but it took some time for copies of the O.D.M.'s papers to reach us. I hope that our points can be considered when the final draft of O.D.M.'s consolidated policy paper to D.V.O. is examined.

3. As regards Burma, I am not happy with the suggestions made in the paper "Exclusion of Certain Countries". Paragraphs 7 and 8 of this paper suggest that whatever treatment is accorded to India and Pakistan, the case of a pensions takeover for Burma should be judged mainly in the light of the outstanding Anglo-Burmese expropriation issue: i.e. the Burmese nationalisation (in most cases without compensation) of British commercial undertakings in Burma, and their refusal to allow remittance of commercial assets or of individuals' private savings. The paper assumes that there would be no public outcry if pensioners who have served in Burma were treated less favourably (from the British angle) than those who served in India and Pakistan.

4.

SEAD's quite extensive experience of letters from M.P.'s and members of the public suggests that this is by no means likely to be the case. Were it to become clear that different treatment was being accorded to those who served in India and Pakistan on the one hand and in Burma on the other, we would certainly expect correspondence on the point of principle involved. As the existence of the expropriation issue does not preclude us from giving technical assistance to the Burmese Government, I cannot see how we could argue convincingly that it should preclude us from taking over Burma pensions as part of a world-wide policy - provided that, as I assume, the taking over of these pensions would not involve a substantial diversion of funds which would otherwise have been devoted to our technical assistance programme.

5. A refusal on our part to include Burma in any takeover of pensions by HMG would certainly not make the Burmese any more amenable on the expropriation question. But it would make us appear somewhat hypocritical. We have, with some success, argued to the Burmese that they should not allow the general expropriation question and their general Exchange Control policy, to prevent them from allowing certain remittances to individuals on purely compassionate grounds. Among those sponsored in this category have been certain Burmese Government pensioners. How should we look if we informed the Burmese that the very same question prevented

/us