Adrian Stephen
MYD
CODE 18-77
Mr Harrington, NTCD
Mr Daly, MVD
Mr Midgley, Consular Dept
Reference..
Separate Copies
TRANSFER OF UK RELATED RECORDS FROM HONG KONG
1.
aཐ་འི་ཅིས་
NTCD (Mr Harringto)
(Min
Пл
MVD) (nn Stephens) that I want a reply.
Please see the attached self explanatory letter from the Hong Kong Immigration Department. Although addressed to Consular Dept, we have agreed to take over the coordinating role for this particular exercise.
2. The letter sets out fully the problem to be faced during the run-up to 1997, with the very large number of records held in Hong Kong on our behalf. These will all need to be either transferred or destroyed by 1997. As I see it the various records will have to be dealt with in one of the following ways:
(i) transfer to UK (either FCO or Home Office)
(ii) transfer to the new British Consulate General in Hong Kong when it opens (expected April 1996)
(iii) destroy (on our authority).
3. In paragraph 8 of the letter, Mrs Tong sets out the Hong Kong Government's proposals for these records and seeks our views. I should be grateful for any comments you have on the suggestions, my initial view is that Hong Kong are (i) carrying far too many old records which can be destroyed now, but that (ii) a lot of the items in para 2 will need to be retained for the statutory period. Most cannot (or should not) be passed to the future Hong Kong Special Administration Region Government when sovereingty reverts to China in 1997.
4. I should be grateful for your considered views and in particular whether we can go along with the proposals at paragraph 8. I have marked the various sections on which I should be grateful for your departmental ruling on disposal of the records.
L
吡
J K Hague
But
16/11.
pond Ogiles us th
cover to retain ("send back to London") British and UK/HK relations only files, and, logically to do as
Hong Kong Department
WH 312
270 2656
13 November 1991
CC:
fi
Mrs C Kellas
Home Office Lunar House
JKHAAD
bcc MXR
12
Ma Bunten (fi
ли надле
Anything
we wish with them. I would have thought this inchredes authorizing thin Lestruction noster Pan. return to London, if Rax's are want what
below-
we decided
rijfirst agreed could not of conte
a this wilt
CONFIDENTIAL
attachment),
Ns no reference to
the agreement
the
D
voy
of
maker!