TNAG-0318-FCO40-354-Legislation-for-immigration-and-deportation-in-Hong-Kong-1971 — Page 15

CONFIDENTIAL

Reference.........

WN146

copy to Mr Gilmour,

Legal Adviser

RECEIVED IN IREGISTRY No. 51

Mr Laird (Hong Kong Dept)

HKK 18/10

HONG KONG IMMIGRATION BILL

Your minute of 30 September about Hong Kong telegram No. 722.

1.

2. I think that what the unofficial members have in mind is that protection from deportation after 7 years should be restricted to "UK belongers". That being so, we must ask that they add to the classification persons registered in the UK, as well as those born, naturalised or adopted, and the wives of such persons, as well as the children. The latter category must be included because the Government are putting down an amendment to the Immigration Bill providing that the wife of a patrial should herself acquire patriality in right of her husband.

3. A fresh formal definition of "UK belonger" will appear in the Government amendment to Clause 2 which will be tabled on Wednesday, 6 October, ready for consideration in the Report Stage in the Lords on 11 October.

4. If protection from deportation after 7 years is restricted to UK belongers it follows that all other citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies except Hong Kong belongers will be liable for deportation at any time if they contravene the rules. But a great number of citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies are not "belongers" anywhere (cf East African Asians) and if they were deported from Hong Kong would have no right of return to another territory and would look to the United Kingdom for a haven. I was unhappy about this and discussed it with the Home Office who were equally unhappy.

<

The sort of situation which could arise is that East African Asians or other UK citizens forced to leave their territories of residence might go to Hong Kong to gain a backdoor method of entry into the UK by deportation. That being so, I was told by the Home Office that if the Hong Kong Government wished to pursue the proposal in paragraph 4 of telegram No. 722 they would require formal notifica- tion for a submission which might have to go to their Ministers.

5. On the understanding that the number of persons involved would be minimal, we have no objection to what is proposed in paragraph 5 of Hong Kong telegram No. 722.

6. I am sending a copy of this minute to Mr Gilmour, Legal Adviser, with whom I have discussed the matter.

4 October 1971

2.G. Jeton

TG Streeton Migration & Visa Dept CL 635 Tel: MB1463

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 15Page 16