CONFIDENTIAL
2.
5.
At the meeting on 23 May, we spent some time considering possible alternatives to the proposed scheme that would not be open to the same objections from Hong Kong. But every possi bility that was mentioned came up against the same fundamental problem: they all involved changing from the present situation where Hong Kong British subjects are nominally in the same category as UK British subjects (even though in practice they enjoy different rights) to a system under which, whatever title was adopted, Hong Kong British subjects would be clearly seen to be in a different category. There seems to be no way round this obstacle if the prime purpose of the new legislation (bringing nationality law in line with immigration law) is to be achieved.
6. Up to now, Hong Kong's comments have concentrated on studying the case against introducing any change. They have not focussed on the details of the proposed scheme if, despite their protests, it does go ahead. It is essential therefore that if a decision is taken to introduce British Overseas Citizenship, Hong Kong should be given ample opportunity to comment on the way the new system is to operate (for example, we do not yet know whether they accept the apparently illogical suggestion that whereas British citizenship will be transmittable through either the male or the female line, British Overseas Citizenship will pass only through the male line).
7. If the proposed scheme is to go ahead, we shall also need to give very careful thought to steps we can take to minimise the risks outlined in paragraphs 2 and 3 above.
WE Quantrill
Hong Kong and General Department
233 4381
31 May 1979
K247
C