TNAG-0979-FCO40-1198-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-British-nationality-1980 — Page 128

CONFIDENTIAL

32

P J Woodfield Esq CB Home Office

50 Queen Anne's Gate LONDON SW 1

Dear Philip,

NEW NATIONALITY LAW

ра

HKK

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

340l,

London SW1A 2AH

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY NO. 51

19 MAR 1980

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

no

PA

på All 1960

14 March 1980

REGISTRY Action Taken

AN

zıl

See

M

Im

1. I am glad we shall be meeting on 18 March to discuss colonial belongers. I shall bring Donald Murray, Dick Clift, the Head of Hong Kong and General Department, and Wilf Jones with me, if that is all right with you. It may be helpful if I set out what seem to me the priority issues for discussion

•

2. First, though Hong Kong is the dependency where the problems over nomenclature have appeared in their most acute form, we agreed to deal with the question as it affects all dependencies. In fact most of the difficulties which have arisen over Hong Kong are reflected in varying degrees in the views of other territories. But I hope we can settle on a form of wording which can be used for all dependencies, ad referendum of course to Ministers.

3. We have an obligation to refer back to Hong Kong and to put the Governor's views to our own Ministers after he has consulted EXCO. Consequently we shall not be able to make any final commitment until we have done that. Nevertheless, I am sure that we can move forward on the main points:-

a) Possible retention of a unitary form of citizenship. Governors in all the major dependencies expect a strong reaction to any proposal that puts a clear end to unitary citizenship. Nevertheless I am certain in my own mind that they must accept that this is not on and convince local opinion accordingly. It follows, however, that there is a political need to make as little change as possible in the present position and to maintain a clear link with the UK. The best way of doing this in my view would be to retain the preiix British Subject at least for UK belongers and Colonia elongers I will be essential in any case to abandon this title in its present usage, but despite your Minister's reluctance to see it preserved in any form I think there are strong political arguments for its retention. The major dependencies want it. It has a colloquial and customary usage. And it would not expand the citizenship we intend to restrict to UK belongers who could then be called 'British Subject, Citizen of the UK'.

TL

CONFIDENTIAL

/b)