TNAG-2269-FCO40-3268-Hong-Kong-Her-Majesty-s-Overseas-Civil-Service-(HMOCS)-poli-1991 — Page 115

CONFIDENTIAL

1968 by Sir Reginald

Prentice, the Minister

for Overseas

"does

loan advances [in lieu of

Development, who told the House of Commons that the as sur ance

not amount to a formal commitment to pay pensions] if there has been a default, but it has been understood

since by OSPA and by the British Government that this would in

effect happen if there was a default".

fundamental part of

12. The "Carr-Robertson" Assurance has become a

HMOC S lore. Since 1943, HMG has intervened оп 12 occasions with loan advances in lieu of pensions: Shanghai, Burma, Pakistan, Aden, Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Malaysia, Nigeria, Uganda, Somalia, the East African Community and Rhodesia (for "loyal Rhodesian" public

servants). In most of these cases, pensions had fallen into arrears

through domestic upheaval or civil war. Eight of the loan advance

schemes postdate the Carr-Robertson Assurance. We have not yet been

asked specifically about the assurance in relation to Hong Kong though the general question of default crops up frequently. We have parried enquiries about default by pointing to the draft agreement,

but we recognise that a direct question about the Carr-Robertson

Assurance (which is bound to come) will require a direct answer.

Given the statement on record, the weight of precedent and the fact

that some thousands of pensions yet to be taken over from

territories other than Hong Kong are understood to be protected by

the Assurance, it is certain that there would be an outcry i f

Ministers were to repudiate it. Nor is it easy to see how a retreat

from the Assurance could be defended.

that Ministers should, if asked a

the as sur ance applies to HMOCS

13. It is therefore recommended

direct question, confirm that officers anywhere, including Hong Kong. (The contingent liability is quantified in para 14 below). Pressure from local officers for similar undertakings, which would probably arise, would have resisted on the grounds that HMG has historically accepted a special obligation to members of HMOCS and that its reaffirmation of this

has no implications for the pensions of local officers.

to be

SHOULD HMG GO BEYOND THE CARR-ROBERTSON ASSURANCE AND SEEK TO TAKE

OVER THE PENSION ENTITLEMENTS OF HONG KONG HMOCS OFFICERS?

ON WHAT TERMS?

IF SO,

CONFIDENTIAL