TNAG-2422-FCO40-3524-Hong-Kong-Her-Majesty-s-Overseas-Civil-Service-(HMOCS)-poli-1992 — Page 139

L

HKA 233/1

Reference

Рил

CONFIDENTIAL

29/4

277

1.

wo

сели

on stone is 29/4.

Pl see minte below

Mr Nigel Co

Hong Kong Department/FCO

in

27/15

HONG KONG: HMOCS MATTERS

1.

From: D S FISH

(Ext 3444)

Date: 24 April 1992

N22

Mr

cox

Thank you

On the last

sentence

idea:

of your Minute below, I

retty

is

this is an interesty agree

it could also be useful in

a limit for any sterling

safeguard We spoke yesterday and agreed the general content of the s proposed submission on sterling safeguards. The HMOCS Committee 294 reaction to our compensation proposals is very much as we expected. I hope that Ministers will agree to proceed on the basis of the scheme as presented but, as I have said all along, it will only be defensible if it is underpinned by a sterling safeguard.

2.

The Governor's assessment that our compensation scheme will buy time and generate goodwill has proved to be wrong. As things stand, it is far from clear how negotiations with the HMOCS Association can readily make progress. It is obvious from their formal response that the right to retire with immediate payment of pension and compensation will be their overriding objective. This is not surprising it is a big prize to play for - and, as you know, I do not envisage our being able to reach an 'agreement' on a package which does not meet this objective.

3. When we met last week we agreed that it would be useful to brief your new Minister on the compensation scheme and to point out very clearly the ways in which it fails to meet the expectations of HMOCS officers. This can be done more easily now that we have their initial reaction. On the assumption that Mr Goodlad endorses our proposals, we need to consider whether to inform Mr Cartland, in advance of our visit, that a traditional compensation arrangement is not a negotiable item. This might ensure that the negotiations take

take place in a more realistic atmosphere, but it does carry the risk that the HMOCS Committee will decide that face to face negotiation would not be worthwhile, and that they would be better advised to pursue their objectives through other means which I expect would be through the Hong Kong Government and the British Parliament.

/4.

The HMOCS Committee's