CONFIDENTIAL
LORD
PRIVY
EAL
immigration position. But they do have a major worry over
the maintenance of confidence in the present and future
stability of Hong Kong. It is not that they are seeking a homeland in the event of Armageddon. They know that their citizenship would not affect that. They are concerned with their political position here and now. Half of the equation
depends on relations with China but equally important is the
perception of HMG's attitude towards Hong Kong. Since a
collapse of confidence in Hong Kong would be our problem as
well, we have a real interest in ensuring that reasonable steps
are taken, if the Gibraltar Amendment stands, to meet that new
situation with effective reassurances which would not damage the
purpose of the Nationality Bill. Otherwise the issue could become
a cause of irritation for years. More than that a slide in
confidence in Hong Kong would have repercussions on our relations
with China which are all too obvious.
4. John Belstead's letter expresses concern about adding
alternative citizenship designations to theBill in case this
causes confusion, particularly with British Citizenship. First
of all, I must make clear that this is not Hong Kong's aim.
They accept that they have no chance of being included in the
British Citizenship category and I am sure that they would not
press for more when Parliament resumes. Moreover, I do not
believe that the amendment which we have proposed would have the effect which you fear. Certainly the alternative description
'British Dependent Territories Citizen' would be unambiguous.
So, I should have thought, would a description which clearly stated the name of the territory to which the person concerned
belonged. There would be less confusion than is already implied
in the category British Overseas Citizen. Moreover, the clause in the Bill itself would make quite clear that everyone's formal
nationality status remained CBDT. However, if the passport problem still causes you difficulty, safeguards could be devised to ensure
that there was no confusion. The most effective would probably
be a stamp stating that the holder did not have the right of abode
in the UK.
/5. I
CONFIDENTIAL