A
CONFIDENTIAL
We would be criticised for putting UK immigration considerations before Hong Kong interests.
Such criticism in
Hong Kong would be likely to play back in the UK and would discourage well disposed Opposition MPs from supporting the Bill. It would almost certainly become known that Ministers
advice about the way the scheme should ignored the Governor's
be constituted. We must have the co-operation of the Hong Kong Government to implement the scheme.
(ii) Subjective criteria for selection and allocation would risk disturbing the balance of the legislation (ie a very short and simple Bill and detailed regulations tabled separately).
to be If the definition of eligibility and numbers were determined by non objective criteria, Parliament would want have its say, and may choose to redefine the categories and
numbers.
(B)
4.
Pruning Certain Unacceptable Categories
This approach would involve retaining the objective basis for
The the scheme, but eliminating the unacceptable categories.
and incorporated into larger remainder would then be reordered portmanteau categories, eg a) business, b) accounting, c) engineering, d) information technology, e) science, f) medical,
An illustration of how this could work is g) legal, h) education.
The allocation of quotas to set out in the attached draft paper.
each group would then be done on the basis of emigratability adjusted by the appropriate variation factor as in the OD (K) paper.
5.
The advantages of this approach are
as follows:
(i) It
could be presented as being consistent with the way in which the scheme was presented on 20 December and in subsequent public statements; that selection would be based on value of the individual's service to Hong Kong and the rate at which people in his job category were emigrating.
(ii) It would retain a significant element of objectivity, which would make it more acceptable to the Governor,
his
CONFIDENTIAL