21-SEP-1993 12:00
SECPRTARY
B4 IND LIVERPOOL
44 051 236 3386
P.02
HOME
Dew Margaret Лотдает
QUEEN ANNE'S GATE LONDON SWIH 9AT
<< Mr Barnes
Mr Langdon
in Rawthorne
Mr
M. Osbor M. with atey Mr Walmsley
Mrs kellas Mr Kelly Ma Carter
Mr Hebblewhite
Thomas Rock.
14 SEP 1993
Thank you for your letter of 15 June about two Hong Kong nationality issues and also for your kind congratulations on my appointment. I am very sorry not to have replied sooner, but I wanted to give these issues careful consideration particularly following the debate on the ethnic minorities in the House of Lords on 15 July. I have been in touch with Chris Patten about both issues -the position of the ethnic minorities and the wives and widows of ex-servicemen.
As you know, the delegation from the Hong Kong Legislative Council also raised these two issues with me. They believe that both groups should be given British citizenship but I am afraid that, as you recognise, this would present great difficulties in both cases.
Needless to say, I have every sympathy with the wives and widows. We have given them a cast iron assurance that they may come here for settlement at any time they wish. The problem is that they do not wish to leave Hong Kong, but would like to have British citizenship and the passport which goes with it. They do not qualify for citizenship under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990 since their age, experience, education and so on do not give them sufficient points to compete successfully. They cannot qualify under the British Nationality Act 1981 without meeting the statutory residence criteria, which I have no discretion to waive. To meet their wishes would therefore uted, sharely require new legislation, which is frankly not in prospect. I can, however, readily repeat the assurance in the strongest possible terms about their freedom to come here for settlement at any time.
bit over-
Having
You will no doubt recall the arguments that have been deployed over the years on behalf of the ethnic minorities in Hong Kong. They were examined very fully in the context of the debates on both the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Order 1986 and the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990. looked at the matter afresh, in the light particularly of what was said in the House of Lords, I can see no grounds for a change in the Government's policy. In my view no new considerations have been advanced since the debates in the 1990 Act to justify the introduction of legislation on the matter.
You may have seen that Charles Wardle made an announcement to this effect in the House of Commons on 26 July. I enclose a copy of the relevant Question and Answer.
The Rt Hon The Baroness Thatcher, OM, FRS
House of Lords
LONDON SWIA OPW
/cont