SECRET
the Bill (which HKG argued would be seen as "disenfranchising" C of
I holders who had not yet got around to applying), and the HKG proposal, that any C of I holder who met the residence requirements
for BDTC status should be eligible under the scheme, even though he
or she had in effect shown no inclination to become a British
subject before. If the Bill is to have the desired effect on confidence in Hong Kong, it is clearly important to avoid criticism
that a large sector of the population perhaps as many as 2 million
C of I holders on present estimates, will be excluded from the
scheme.
—
Occupational Groups
6.
The submission argues that no occupational groups should be
excluded altogether proiided the numbers allocated to the lesser
skilled groups are not large as this would be seen as divisive in
Hong Kong and would be vulnerable to criticism in the UK as elitist
(the lower level groups account for over 2 million, or 78% of the
2.6 m workforce). By definition only the most highly skilled in
these groups (eg multi-lingual secretaries) would qualify as key
personnel under the points scheme. Moreover, cutting the numbers in
those groups too severely would make it extremely difficult for
staff from the Garrison to qualify under the points scheme, since
most of them would come under the "secretarial and clerical" or "skilled and semi-skilled" occupational groups.
Proficiency in English/British Links
7. The submission argues that proficiency in English should be
regarded as a valuable asset under the points scheme but that no one
should automatically be disqualified by a lack of it (a number of
Hong Kong's most wealthy entrepreneurs speak very little English).
Similarly, points for British links are likely to be very important
in sorting our the successful from a mass of otherwise equally
qualified candidates. But too much emphasis on British links might
distort the 2:1 ration in favour of the public sector because it
would tend to favour officials of HKG. Moreover it would be seen in
SECRET