1(b)
3
Before turning to substance, I wish to make two other
points:
(a) timetable. We were disappointed to learn that CSB were
unable to get copies of our statement to all HMOCS officers as quickly as we had expected. We received many complaints on this score, ie that after years of reflection in London we were now giving officers only a
few days or even hours to make their comments. We should be grateful if, when the opportunity arises, you would convey our apologies for this unfortunate delay. The timetable we proposed for consultations was always tight so that we could realistically aim to announce decisions on the scheme early in June but we had hoped individual officers would have at least ten days to comment. We much regret the apparent discourtesy.
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.
statement for obscurity.
We
Many comments criticised our opening
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.
We 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).
NJCABT/2
The presentational
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.