HICK 340/10
1980
зда FOLLO
1981
PP HONG KONG
GRS 344
CONFIDENTIAL
FM FCO 051135Z FEB 81
TO PRIORITY HONG KONG
CONFIDENTIAL
TELEGRAM NUMBER 103 OF 5 FEBRUARY
AND TO PRIORITY PEKING
FOR GOVERNOR FROM CLIFT.
NATIONALITY BILL.
1.
DOL
HKK 340/1
RECEIVED IN REACT NO. 51 748 MAR 1981
DESK LFICER
INDEX
ملال
(62)
See/66
PA
$15.4.
57
REGISTRY
STA
Action Taken
PGO 815
IT IS CLEAR FROM THE DEBATE ON THE SECOND READING OF THE BILL
THAT THERE WILL BE CONSIDERABLE PRESSURE IN COMMITTEE FOR
SEPARATE CITIZENSHIPS FOR DEPENDENT TERRITORIES. MINISTERS ARE
PREPARED TO MAINTAIN THEIR STAND, IF THEY HAVE ADEQUATE ARGUMENTS
THEY CAN MAKE IN PUBLIC. THE HONG KONG CASE IS BY FAR THE
STRONGEST AND MINISTERS NEED THEREFORE TO BE PREPARED TO BE AS
FRANK ABOUT IT AS POSSIBLE.
2.
I REALISE THAT IN JANUARY 1980 'BRITISH SUBJECT: HONG KONG CITIZEN' WAS A STRONG FAVOURITE WITH EXCO (HONG KONG TELNO 95 OF HER
15 JANUARY 1980). BUT WHAT IS NOW PROPOSED WOULD NOT INCLUDE
'BRITISH SUBJECT'. MORE IMPORTANT, IT WOULD NOT FORM PART OF A
COLLECTIVE CITIZENSHIP WITH A STRONG BRITISH CONNECTION. MORE-
OVER, IT WOULD PRESUMABLY BE EVEN MORE OPEN TO THE OBJECTIONS
340/
1980
340/1C198
RAISED BY PEKING (PEKING TELNO 41 OF 16 JANUARY 1980 AND BANGKOK HKR 340/115
TELNO 060 OF 17 JANUARY 1980). YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT O V CHEUNG
SAID TO LORD CARRINGTON ON 2 FEBRUARY THAT A SEPARATE HONG KONG CITIZENSHIP WOULD NOT RAISE TOO MANY DIFFICULTIES WITH THE PRC
IF IT WERE ONE OF A NUMBER OF DEPENDENT TERRITORIES CITIZENSHIPS.
HOWEVER, HE APPEARED TO BE EXPRESSING A PERSONAL VIEW.
3.
SUBJECT TO YOUR VIEWS, THEREFORE, WE PROPOSE THAT MINISTERS
SHOULD BE BRIEFED TO SPEAK ON THE FOLLOWING LINES:
'SEPARATE CITIZENSHIPS FOR THE DEPENDENT TERRITORIES WOULD BE
INAPPROPRIATE IN THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF HONG KONG.
THE MOVE WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE VIEWS PUT
FORWARD FROM HONG KONG ABOUT THE BILL. IT WOULD BE TAKEN AS
A WEAKENING OF THE LINKS BETWEEN HONG KONG AND THE UK ONE
OF THE CRITICISMS ALREADY MADE ABOUT THE BILL. IT COULD ALSO
-
1
CONFIDENTIAL