NOTE OF A MEETING HELD ON 18 JULY 1989
чний
624 Mcwood
HONG KONG: MEETING WITH LORD DERWENT AND MR SIMON MURRAY
HED 34018
Present:
Home Secretary
Mr Storr
Lord Derwent Mr Simon Murray
Wirts
Both of Hutchison Whampoa (hi Kashings Company).
The meeting had been arranged to enable Lord Derwent and Mr Murray, a businessman working in Hong Kong, to give the Home Secretary their views about the action the Government should consider taking in relation to citizens of Hong Kong in the light of the recent troubles in China.
2.
Mr Murray said that the business community in Hong Kong was "fringing on panic". He cited a recent approach to his company from one of the largest public companies in Hong Kong offering to sell their entire business at what he termed a ridiculously small price. Since the events at Tianɔn men Square, 280 of his company's Chinese employees had applied for foreign passports. Both he and Lord Derwent were naturally keen to do all they could to prevent over-reaction to the situation in China from threatening the long term future of Hong Kong. But they were unable to take any effective action without some sort of indication from the Government as to what action it proposed to take. Mr Murray recognised that giving British passports to 3 million British Dependent Territories Citizens was not a realistic option. He preferred a scheme based on categories which would be effective even if it simply offered post-dated passports. He recognised that this was open to the criticism that it favoured the elite among the Hong Kong community. But the key point was that unless key personnel could be persuaded to stay, the future of Hong Kong was in danger. Whatever the option the Government chose, it would be wrong in his view to prescribe a top limit of the numbers to be admitted as this would only encourage a scramble.
3.
In response, the Home Secretary set out the options which the Government were considering. By using his discretion under the Immigration Rules, he could allow people from Hong Kong to come and settle in this country. This would give them a right of abode but not citizenship although, with the necessary residence, they could qualify for citizenship later. While a change along these lines would not require primary legislation, it represented such a major development of policy that it would be necessary to seek Parliamentary approval for what was proposed. The other option, the citizenship route, would require primary legislation. Any such legislation was likely to be vigorously resisted by the Opposition who would seek to exploit comparisons and contrasts between the Government's treatment of Hong Kong citizens and its policy towards those from New Commonwealth countries.
/4.
The Home