2
1981. When the then UMELCO Members anxiously and repeatedly
sought clarifications on the rationale behind the need to split
British Nationals into different classes and introduce the new
nomenclature for those British subjects residing in Hong Kong, we
were repeatedly assured then of the purity of intention of the
1981 British Nationality Act and that there were really no
sinister motives behind the change. Further, when UMELCO Members
learnt of the concessions about to be requested by Members of the
Upper House for the citizens of the Gibraltar and Falkland
Islands, we acted swiftly and started to lobby a number of peers
in the House of Lords on behalf of Hong Kong. We were unaminous
in deciding to send a delegation to London at our own expense to further buttress our lobbying efforts. Regrettably, our efforts were thwarted by people who were supposedly our friends through their skillful deployment of stalling tactics. We were advised by people whom we implicitly trust that the House of Lords will pass the Bill with a wide margin so that any further moves made by Hong Kong or indeed by any other places like Gibraltar and Falkland Islands would not have any chance of succeeding. British Government only managed to secure the miniscule margin of 2 votes and to add insult to injury the Gibraltarians and the Falklanders succeeded in making their seemingly impossible dreams came true. To this date, Sir, sadly, I venture to postulate that practically all of us who were UMELCO Members then still have the
The one question that nagging feeling of unease in our minds. will remain forever unanswered is that could we have turned the
Well, the