Reference
The meeting accepted that this approach was not without problems. There may be legal challenges during the transition period from EC nationals over the validity of our definition of posts as "public service" (and therefore excluded to EC nationals) if Irish nationals continue to occupy them. Nevertheless the consensus was that any challenges be braved
out.
6.
But there is another potentially serious problem of particular concern to the FCO. Although OCSC in its new guidelines will encourage departments to keep their "public service" core as small as possible, and indeed Mr Packham reported that the majority of the twenty or so departments that had responded to his earlier EOM paper appeared to be doing just that, the fact remains that departments will be pretty much free to define their own "public service" posts as they see fit. We will have to rely on their common sense in their designations. It appears highly unlikely that there will be any consistency in the designation of "public service" posts between departments. Already the Inland Revenue has declared its intention to define all posts at AO level and above as "public service". There are signs that the Home Office may be thinking along similar lines. If this trend is followed by others, many Irish nationals may find employment in the British Civil Service denied to them. Departments were unable to answer the question in the last EOM paper about numbers of Irish nationals in the Civil Service because they do not have any mechanisms for ethnic monitoring of employees. However, given the large numbers of Irish nationals resident in the UK the number is likely to be considerable. Could we not then expect the Irish government to protest? (Although any protest is likely to be tempered by the fact that the British nationals do not enjoy reciprocal rights of employment in the Irish Civil Service.) Beyond the narrow Irish angle, Mr Berman, Legal Advisers, foresees problems with Commonwealth countries and dependent territories. Clearly it is not in our interests for government departments to use this opportunity to become more restrictive in their recruitment policies. But short of compromising departmental autonomy it is difficult to see how this can be prevented.
7.
Once the new EOM paper reaches us we will have ten days to produce a coordinated FCO response incorporating the views of Legal Advisers, ECD (I), RID, CCD, PPD and possibly WIAD and HKD. I am not sure who should coordinate the response but I suspect ECD (I) should be in the lead given that the reason for this exercise is to ensure HMG's compliance with EC law.
MINISTERIAL CONSULTATION
8.
The EOM paper as amended by departments' comments will form the basis of a letter from Mr Waldegrave to the Secretary of State and copied to other Ministers. The letter will ask Ministers to endorse the recommendations in paragraph 4 above and agree a timetable for the implementation of the new policy.
CODE 18-77
ID 3144
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.