HONG KONG:
MR BLAKER'S MEETING WITH MPS ON THE NATIONALITY BILL:
30 MARCH 1981
POINTS TO MAKE
1. The amendments contained in the proposed new Clause 9 are of
general application. Intended to cover a number of anomalies in
original drafting. Should meet the main practical points Hong Kong have raised. We believe their difficulties are now largely
met.
2. (If asked whether Hong Kong's concern stems from worries over
the future of the Territory) No. Their concerns are partly
practical and partly to underline and consolidate links between
the UK and Hong Kong. HMG are conscious of these links and
have reaffirmed their commitment to Hong Kong and its people (eg
Mr Whitelaw in 2nd Reading debate).
3. (If asked what sort of people would be covered by Home
Secretary's discretionary powers.) Impossible to say what categories would be involved. Criteria would be mixture of type
of service and individual circumstances of each case. Idea to make
sure that no-one is excluded from consideration. But doubtful
that large numbers would be involved. (If Pressed.) The civil
service, plus police, in Hong Kong amount to about 130,000. But no question of these numbers being involved. Pointless to speculate
on numbers because of tight exercise of discretion.
4. (If asked why Hong Kong's requests cannot be met on
nomenclature.) A different matter. Change in nomenclature would
strike at the basic principles of the Bill. Have to differentiate a separate British Citizenship based on abode.
5. (If asked about a separate citizenship for Hong Kong.) Would be
inappropriate. Hong Kong's interest is much more to demonstrate its
Britishness. Could also be misunderstood by China. But does not necessarily rule out enabling clause which other territories could
take up if they wished.