RESTRICTED
Любать
Mr Star
The Ricketts Ms with
Thanks. The PES roud is
son's hadly to the Aid was
p
63 14/Ngan HKB 233/1 ceth Chase RMD
се
FROM: M V Stone
I ad is not promising DATE: 8 October 1991
no). A. Let me know if there is
(146
Hong Kong Department
し
any sign of th
And Wing reading tattubuli & thow.
Mr Ricketts
Burns
3439
You might Copy His to Mr Mair.
Mr Budhg 9 Rearruring for He DW, provided He PES
M. Maur
allocation com be agreed.
HMOCS MATTERS: WHICH WING PICKS UP THE TAB?
1/10.
Zde RICHAR
RICHARD MUIR
1. You sought assurance that if funding obligations are
accepted by HMG on HMOCS matters, they would all be met by ODA. Whilst I cannot be categorical, there is no obvious place on the Diplomatic Wing vote where such funds could be
drawn from.
2.
When Sir G Howe sought the Chancellor's agreement for a
compensation/incentive scheme in 1988, he proposed that the costs should be born by the ODA's Overseas Superannuation Vote. He also said that he could not defend publicly diversion of funds from the aid vote to a territory which does not qualify for it. In reply Mr Major, then Chief
Secretary to the Treasury, did not dispute that the funds should come from this vote but did not give an undertaking on the source of funds as the requiremnet was well into the future. Thus, the ODA have acknowledged that the
compensation scheme would fall to them.
3. As regards SPOS, the ODA already fund existing SPOS
payments and would clearly take on this additional burden.
4.
As regards a sterling safeguard, again, historically this is something that the ODA would always have dealt with. There is no justification for the ODA to argue that, in the single case of Hong Kong, the Diplomatic Wing should pay.
TICABM/1
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.