TNAG-2423-FCO40-3525-Hong-Kong-Her-Majesty-s-Overseas-Civil-Service-(HMOCS)-poli-1992 — Page 35

RESTRICTED

officers more favourable treatment than their predecessors

elsewhere:

(a) they had not been consulted about the constitutional change ie before the initialling of the Joint Declaration

(JD);

(b) Hong Kong would not become independent or exercise self- determination;

(c) Hong Kong would not remain a member of the Commonwealth;

(d) sovereignty over Hong Kong would be in the hands of a regime which was noted for its corruption, its violation of human rights (Tiananmen etc) and its record of dishonouring

its obligations;

(e) HMOCS officers had very thin prospects of securing any further employment not just in the Dependent Territories, as we had mentioned, but also in the UK: the grim unemployment figures in the UK, the officers' long absence from the job

market, and their age.

5.

The special factors which we mentioned as having been

taken into account in drawing up the scheme we proposed were based on false premises or were irrelevant:

(a) the issue was the termination of sovereignty and thus of

termination of careers in HMOCS, and not the JD. But as we

had raised the JD they would make some observations about

it. Whatever the expectations in 1984, and the efforts of many HMOCS officers make it work, efforts which would continue, it had become apparent that China was quite capable of interpreting the JD as it liked. HMG should know this as well as those HMOCS officers who had been closely

NJCACN/2

RESTRICTED