20 AUG 1902 13:33
IAUL riroot
0072720755
the benefit of the arrangements been confined to members of HMOCS, but has extended to other pensionable officers who satisfy certain recruitment criteria and, in the latter case have not become nationals of the former colony. Practice in matters which have an Effect on the sterling value of pensions has, therefore, not been confined to members of HMOCS.
If HMG were to decide themselves to provide a sterling guarantee for Hong Kong pensions, is there anything to prevent them confining that guarantee to members of HMOCS ? It can be argued that:
(a) the provision of a sterling guarantee is a new departure, not a provision that has been made in the past; it is not analogous to the provision of a guarantee by the former colonial government or to a decision to assume responsibility for the payment of pensions, a decision taken as much to relieve the overseas government as to benefit pensioners and therefore of no relevance to Hong Kong ;
(b) that HMG have, and have re-iterated both in the past and in relation to Hong Kong their particular responsibility for HMOCS, not for any wider category of Hong Kong public servants;
(c) there has been plenty of opportunity for those who have the appropriate recruitment qualifications to join HMOCS;
(d) nothing said by or on behalf of HMG in relation to the Hong Kong public service can be construed as giving anyone other than members of HMOCS grounds for believing that HMG will provide benefits or seek safeguards for them other than those set out in JD
73.
5. As against this, I do not think it can be denied that there are grounds for maintaining that, in the past, when something has been done that has some effect on maintaining the value of pensions paid to expatriates, persons other than members of HMOCS have benefitted. The Overseas Service Pensioners' Association has not been consistent in its language, but both that association and the Association of Expatriate Civil Servants of Hong Kong have referred to pensionable officers including members of HMOCS and we have not denied responsibility for the wider description. I do not think that this provides sufficient grounds for a reasonable expectation, as distinct from a claim, that all expatriate pensionable officers will be entitled to a sterling guarantee from HMG. On the other hand, I do take the view that to exclude the non-HMOCS expatriate pensionable officer from arrangements made which have an effect, or may have an effect, on the value of their pensions would be a change in the considerations which have determined our past practice. If this is the course we intend to take, it would be prudent to avoid the charge of unfairness if we are prepared with our reasons for making the change and are able to deploy those reasons if and when it becomes a matter in issue.
6.
Do you need to make a public announcement now that HMG will not make provision for anyone other than a member of
2
r.82/83
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.