early in June but we had hoped individual officers would have at least ten days to comment. We much regret the apparent discourtesy. We have given full attention to those comments received after the deadline (up to 4 May). We have noted your comments about the HKG deadline for opting for the new pensions scheme and will be considering this question together with the Hong Kong Government.
(b) opening statement. Many comments criticised our opening
statement for obscurity. We accept that it might have been possible to redraft parts of it to make it clearer. And we regret in particular that the formulation of paragraph 7 has caused a misunderstanding of our position on the question of the loyalties of HMOCS officers: we shall revert to this point later. However it is not our impression that these deficiencies have caused any significant misunderstanding of the outline proposal itself, so we believe that our consultations can proceed on course.
Hope HMOCS officers will accept that there is no intention on our part to rush them or mislead them on matters of great importance to them and their families (as well as to Hong Kong and to HMG). The presentational short-comings I have mentioned were linked perhaps to Ministers' wish, once they had formulated a basis for discussion to respond to HMOCS officers' wish for early progress and for clearer news well before 30 June. Nor did we wish any Ministerial changes after the General Election to cause any unnecessary loss of momentum or delay. However I can assure you that we have been considering the substance of the issues very carefully indeed.
NJCABT/2
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.