CONFIDENTIAL
argue that
the lack of 3 name
the indicates that
substance is also
missing;
are
(b)
that argue
the provisions to
to guard
guard against statelessness not sufficiently spelt out and that the Bill should show the status to be acquired by those who would otherwise be stateless.
Ministers will wish to take the line that the detailed provisions of the Order in Council have to be fully discussed with Hong Kong, and that there was insufficient time to do this early enough to meet the need for the enabling Bill to be passed in time for ratification of
The timing of the Order the agreement in June.
in Council has not
yet been decided, but it will probably need to be in place in 1986 in order to fit in with the normal 10-validity period of passports,
to give Hong Kong as much time as possible to issue passports to
and
all who want them.
Ministers
able to announce
be ma y
our intention to use the title
"British National (Overseas)", If they are not, they will wish to
refer to the sensitivity of this and
and the
the care with which a title
must be chosen. But the lack of an agreed title does not mean that the substance is missing. The new status will equate in all major respects to BDTC, except for transmissibility.
[To be updated in the light of Chinese reactions].
to
On the question of statelessness,
statelessness, Ministers will wish to take the
line that the safeguards are quite explicit. No former Hong Kong BDTC, nor any child born after June 1997 such a person, will be
left without
nationality if he
she or
would
otherwise be stateless. It is intended that such persons
acquire British Overseas citizenship.
a
form of British
should
THE NATIONALITY PROVISIONS IN THE UK MEMORANDUM
Another
likely area
likely area of difficulty will be the nationality provisions set out in the UK Memorandum itself. Ministers could face criticism
both from those who believe we are doing too much
are doing too much for the people of Hong Kong and from those who feel that HMG have done too little.
CONFIDENTIAL