Jear Lord Caithness,
rosswinds
24 udworth Road.Cxton.
Birkenhead. Merseyside L43 97' 17th December 1990
Mr. Paul, Head of long Kong Department, has sent me a copy of your letter to 'r. Krit Sneed MP dated 29th November on the subject of Hong Kong HMCCS pensions. It was sent to me because it was thought it covered the points and questions had raised in my letter to Dr. Francis Maude. Unfortunately nour letter does not answer my cuestions which I would still like to be answered and commented upon.
lu first question was how did Pr.laude arrive at his belief that the "majority of pensioners) regard them! SPOS arrangements) as satisfactory"? Also,
as a result of this belief, was"not convinced there was a case for changing them. I have never been circulatedto be asked my view on SPOS,neither have many
others to mu personal knowledge. If asked I would reply that SPOS was ludicrously unsatisfactory and to back this up I would quote my May and September 1987 SPCS which was 10nence an! 19 pence respectively for a loss in pension when calculated against my personal exchange rate(PER) of $350.00 in those months. Currentlu mu pension is about 375.1 less than the same monthin the first ucar svent on retirement in this country, 6 years ago, and nearly $800.00 less than I woul! receive if calculated at my PER. Surely such facts clearly illustrate the gravity of the situation of depreciating pension income for post 1976 Hong Kona pensioners.
The longer such beliefs are held and passed on to others, in this case that SMS is satisfactory to the majority, the more difficult it is for an arnument to presented by pensioners and considered properly by HMG.May I suggest that a first step should be to ask all post 1976 Hong Kong pensioners what they think of SPOS.
My second fundamental question was obviously similar to Prs. Dansell's, ie, how did another belief arise that Hong Kong pensioners, rost 1976 continue to do reasonably well, certainly in comparison with ! counterparts"?
•
In your letter you give three reasons I would be grateful if you would consider my comments on these reasons.
(alTo achieve a full 33 years pension benefit from Hong Kong an officer would need to be appointed at the age of 22 or earlier. For the majority of
postl
Page 255Page 256
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.