)
Mr Cox HKD
cox
edi pl the see the previous pp again?
From:
Date:
D I Lewty
Migration and Visa Department
25 August 1992
CC: Mr Baker, WIAD
ам
Tel out Enter B/U (wk
M
(77
WORKING HOLIDAYMAKERS (WHMS)
28/mm
We spoke briefly about your minute of 19 August commenting on my draft submission, whose recommendation Mr Lennox-Boyd approved on 22 August.
1.
2. I can well understand the sensitivity of such matters in Hong Kong at present. (I imagine that they will become more, not less, so as 1997 gets closer, so if we are to do anything, 'twere well it were done quickly?) However, you agreed that the problem was not the substance of the HO's proposals, but that any change for the worse in the rights of access to the UK by HK DTCs or BOCs would be unwelcome; and that we were therefore into questions of presentation etc (rather than policy), which might be soluble. You kindly agreed to consult Hong Kong accordingly.
3.
You may find it helpful to see the attached copy of my minute of 25 August to Mr Holmes, SPD, which sets out MVD's view that the HO have made a reasonable fist of preserving the essentials of the WHM scheme for genuine beneficiaries, whilst also reducing abuse of it.
4.
Mutatis mutandis, the same arguments against discriminating in favour of Australia apply to Hong Kong, though one should perhaps distinguish between DTCS, who will cease to exist after 1997, and BOCS, who will not. Indeed, I am not sure to what extent (explicit) favouring of some Commonwealth countries over others would be acceptable to FCO Departments, let alone the HO (or the Legal Advisers).
5. I am copying this minute to Mr Baker in WIAD, since he indicated earlier that the acceptability of the HO's proposals to Dependent Territories for which WIAD is responsible might depend on whether or not they were so to Hong Kong.
Dimens
D I Lewty
HKD 34071
2 8 AUG 1992