TNAG-0800-FCO40-1004-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-British-Nationality-1978 — Page 4

BY BAG

*

布政司署

港下亞畢道

* OUR Ref.:

SCR 39/2091/72)

HKK

來函檔號 YOUR REF.:

RJT McLaren Esq

Hong Kong & General FCO

Dear kalim

340

See 25

RECEIVED IN REGISTZY NO.

16 NOV 1978

Department OFFICER

INDEX

PA

5744.

REGIR TRY

24

GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

6th November, 1978

donte be grateful for a

confum 52

we

cam

ction Tem

In the Quay kin

No HK Roget's

под

GREEN PAPER ON BRITISH NATIONALITY LAW

14/**

Please let me see with the paper: +57).

CNTA Discussed with NoGran

Draft reply is. Chantill

W.

When I called on you in the office in September to discuss the Green Paper on British Nationality Law, you expressed the view that you thought it unlikely that Ministers would wish to drop the proposals for British Overseas Citizenship. I pointed out that with the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu having obtained independence in 1978 and with the Gilbert Islands likely to be independent in 1979, the proposed BOC status would have the appearance of being even more obviously aimed primarily at Hong Kong than when the Green Paper was published last year.

2.

Chantill

You said that you would, of course, continue to present our case and that there might be two alternatives, the first of which would be to seek to devise some sort of special nationality status for Hong Kong. You said that you did not think that this would be easy, nor that it would provide much of an answer. An alternative might be that when a White Paper is published it should include a statement that the proposals in it made no change whatsoever in HMG's commitment to Hong Kong: if such a proposal did not find favour then you thought that at least it would be possible to give such an assurance in the course of the debate on the White Paper.

3.

In the meantime you said that you would either send a brief acknow- ledgement to Sir Denys Roberts despatch of the 7th July or send a more substantial reply explaining that the BOC proposal was central to the scheme, was not specifically directed at Hong Kong and answering the points which were made in the despatch. I understood that you were going to defer a decision about this until after your visit to Hong Kong.

4.

I now see that in fact an acknowledgement to the despatch was sent on the 10th October whilst you were still here. I wonder if you could let me know what were the reasons which decided the office to take this action rather than wait for you to consider the position following your visit to Hong Kong, and in the light of our discussions in September. Could you also confirm that it is still the intention to include some reference to HMG's commitment to Hong Kong in the White Paper in due course.

quino

whif

(L M Davies,

Secretary for Security