CONFIDENTIAL
Page 252
had been selected for their talents and experience. The stakes were high; if Hong Kong opinion were not reassured and a crisis of confidence occurred, there could be a real risk of a major refugee influx into the United Kingdom on a far larger scale than the figures suggested in his Memorandum.
In discussion, the following main points were made:
NFIDENTIAL
a. The Government had a duty to provide suitable assurances for those in Hong Kong, particularly for public servants who because of their past and continuing work might be at risk under Chinese rule. This factor of moral responsibility
hould be stressed both in public presentation and to the Government's supporters in Parliament.
Citizenship would give recipients a better incentive to remain in Hong Kong than right of abode, whose benefits could be enjoyed only by coming to the United Kingdom. The latter requirement had sometimes worked to the United Kingdom's lisadvantage in the past.
C.
The reference in the statement to anchoring in Hong Kong those who need to be retained there was misleading. It would be betto speak of encouraging them to remain in Hong Kong in to keep business and administration going.
d. Those who decided to come to the United Kingdom would be likely to be assina more easily than other immigrant groups, and many of themould undertake productive and job- creating investment British economy. It could be aged that the Unitedom had been short-sighted in not making it easier for entrepreneurs who wanted to invest here to qualify for citizenship oreover, those who came were unlikely to congregate in areas where there were already large numbers of Asian and Indian immigrants.
argued / and that the United
The ceiling chosen should trike a balance between the anxieties of Hong Kong in the wake of events in China earlier in the year, and the impact of possible substantial immigration on the United Kingdom and on domestic opinion.
f. The beneficiaries selected under the theme would be heads of household, and there would be a demand both in Hong Kong and in the United Kingdom for the daily to be expressed in those terms.
N
g. Although the appropriate multiplier for ging heads of household to total beneficiaries including dependents was difficult to quantify, the figure of 3.75 implied
the
draft statement was probably too low if account was taken of children who might be born after the award of citizenstre
!
2
Page 252
CONFIDENTIAL
ENTIAL
Page 252 of