CONFIDENTIAL
NOTE FOR FILE
some cases if the Security Services so stamped an application it was highly unlikely it would succeed.
5.
The point was made that HMOCS officers wre not uniquely disadvantaged by this arrangement. The Security Service could easily conduct checks on foreign residents in a limited range of countries (ie, Commonwealth, NATO). Outside those, all applicaths would be in the same position as HMOCS officers. It was also noted that a negative presumption did not mean
automatically a negative decision; each case was decided on
its merits.
Residence Requirements
6.
The MOD also confirmed that they would enforce the
residency rules (it was not clear whether this would be
post-1997 or now). They maintained that this was essential to
enable a proper assessment to be made of loyalty,
relationships etc. While the Security Services urged a
flexible interpretation of the residency rules, the armed forces tended rigidly to apply the five year requirement.
Children
1.
given
But
The MOD and Security Service began by saying that children
of HMOCS officers serving beyond 1997 would face the same
disadvantages that PV checks included checks on parents. they later backed away from this a bit, acknowledging that if
a child had been to school in the UK, and the further
education here, the relevance of parental service in post-1997
Hong Kong would be reduced.
Where to from here?
8. We clearly have a problem in this area and on the
question of consular protection for Chinese race spouses
vis-a-vis our policy of trying to encourage HMOCS members to stay on post-1997. During the discussions with the HMOCS
emp.hmg.ADM
SLM
CONFIDENTIAL