TNAG-2686-FCO40-3888-Hong-Kong-Her-Majesty-s-Overseas-Civil-Service-(HMOCS)-poli-1993 — Page 88

04/05/93 12:57

Garden Paterson

AHS04

Copy to:

Mr Duke

Mr Fish,

Mr MacDonald

PENSION SUPPLEMENT REGULATIONS

R B BLANCHE

SIR NIGEL REED

NO.989

Alan Misad

CC to Spos Regs, HK. and [Exchange rat fil- ... Ass irligi

Amisall

I had a conversation

It is requested that I

1. I refer to your minute of 1 March. with Mr Fish on 30 March during which we discussed the general merits of the Blanche and Reed cases. record below my concerns on the general merits of these t cases. If

wish further comment on you

any particular detail Mr Blanche's complaint please get in touch.

of

2.

My concern is that the complaint and line of argument in the case of Sir Nigel Reed casts a shadow also over defence of the way in which the SPOS Regulations deal with exchange rate fluctuations. Both cases from their respective starting points call into question the extent to which the SPOS Regulations may be used as a mechanism for ansuring comparability with UK pension provision.

3. The line of argument for Six Nigel Reed focuses on the fact to that the PIA 1971 is concerned to

to provide for increases pensions. It has no direct concern with payment of the pensions or the rate of the original award merely with increases on those In relation to overseas pensions to which the Act extands. pensions the Act provides for supplement corresponding "as nearly as may be" to increases on official pensions and authority to pay supplement is extended at the Secretary of State's discretion through regulations. However, the argument runs that it is not the concern of the Act and cannot therefore be the concern of regulations made under the Act to achieve comparability between UK and overseas pension provisions generally but merely that there be comparability as between the increase-and supplement.

▲ .

Authority for a broader concern for comparability has traditionally rasted on the use of the words "as nearly as may be" in section 11(4). It is argued that this broader approach has positive results for pensioners in that the provisions of section 8(2) of the Act are displaced by the SPOS Regulations and the last salary roviau data de substitutod do the deemed date of Commencement. In our present defenca we focus on that positive aspect as exemplifying even handedness in the concern for a broad comparability.

5.

While Sir Nigel Reed's complaint is directed against the negativa aspects of this concern for comparability should his argument prevail the question mark placed against the competence mind in the context of positive aspects will have to be harne in of the new SPOS regulations.

43

C31007.043