CONFIDENTIAL
-
candidates who do not. They are also concerned that a process
of nomination by companies would open up risks of corruption. Their view and I see some strength in it is that young people
likely to be moving into key positions can more fairly be dealt
with in the allocation of the second tranche of the 50,000
places, nearer to 1997.
5. My own view is that the balance of advantage lies in not
proceeding with the secondment scheme. That view is based not
simply on the arguments in the last paragraph but more
particularly on the practicalities.
The administrative
procedures involved in assessing the bona fides of organisations
wishing to participate, approving their schemes and allocating
the available places between them would
would be cumbersome and
disproportionate to the relatively small numbers (500 or even
1,000) who might benefit (see paragraph 30 onwards of Annex A).
The areas of discretion which would be required to operate the
scheme would give scope for challenge by way of judicial review
in the UK. Moreover,
the inclusion of the secondment scheme
would undoubtedly complicate the drafting of the Bill and hamper
our chances of early introduction. I recommend, therefore, that
we do not proceed with this proposal, but point to
tranche of applications under the general scheme as a more
appropriate way of dealing with those moving into key positions
in the future.
THE SELECTION SCHEME
6. If the approved secondment scheme is dropped, the selection
scheme will have three components:
a)
a General Allocation Scheme (GAS) covering broad Occupational groups across the public and private sectors and based on a points system;
CONFIDENTIAL
3
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.