Turning now to the heart of the matter, I should like to
begin with an explanation of the nature of the proposed
scheme. (Speaking Note at Annex II). I mentioned that I
should like later on to make a statement about the question
of loyalty, but I hope that this account of the nature of
our scheme already helps make clear that we fully accept
that it must be a matter of individual choice for ex-HMOCS
officers to decide whether to continue in the service of the
SAR. There is no legal obligation on them to do so, and we
do not assert that there is any moral obligation on them to
do so either.
-
In my letter of 30 April I have already set out the present position on the question of early retirement with immediate payment of pension and the question of sterling
safeguards for pensions.
derd
- We do not, however, wish to inhibit discussion on these
issues or on the general question of compensation. It is
our task to inform ourselves fully on your views on these
matters. But we must also ask you to address the outline of
outline our proposals and in particular the proposals for phasing
payments. Further, in paragraph 8 of your comments you
mention you wish to raise some detailed points, and we look
forward to hearing from you on these. But first, in order
to give you a more concrete indication of our present
thinking, I may perhaps mention that one option we have been considering is for benefits to be payable over a maximum of
nine years, with 10% of the notional maximum paid on or soon
after 30 June 1997 and subsequent payments of 10%, up-rated
in line with the UK RPI, due annually thereafter up to
30 June 2006 so long as the officer remains in the service
of the SAR. In the case of an officer due to retire earlier
than this, then, after the initial payment, his subsequent
payments should reflect the fact that he cannot serve the
NJCABT/3
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.