TNAG-0979-FCO40-1198-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-British-nationality-1980 — Page 149

CODE 18-77

SS 8/78

Mr W E Quantrill

Quanfr111

CONFIDENTIAL

A charice ne Williamson

thomine Juh

-

8229/2

HKGD, K247

Reference

HKK 3401,

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY NO. 51

3 MAR 1980

-

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

Mo

PA

21.

REGISTRY Acron Taken

Aw 21/31

NATIONALITY LAW: WHITE PAPER

1. To clear up any confusion which might still exist following our exchange of minutes recently (paragraph 3 of Mr Williamson's letter of 27 February to Mr Davies, Hong Kong, indicates there might still be some misunderstanding), what the Home Secretary said was that although it was no longer possible to introduce a Nationality Bill during the present Parliamentary session ending October, it is intended to publish a White Paper 'in 1980'. No target date was stated but a White Paper is not tied to a Parliamentary session in the way that a Bill must be. No mention was made of not publishing a White Paper until after the present session is over.

monter

2. Now that the Home Secretary has got the new Immigration Rules out of the way, he could call for a White Paper on nationality at any time, as he did att notice with the White Paper on immigration last year, as a result of political pressures being put on him. The same could happen on nationality. The Home Office are consequently working flat out to prepare the new nationality law, the framework of which has already been agreed by the appropriate Cabinet Committee. The only issue of major importance still outstanding is the nomenclature for the colonial citizen category. With that resolved, a White Paper could be drafted straight away.

3. This highlights, I think, the danger to Hong Kong of allowing the issue of nomenclature to drag indefinitely. If there is sufficient additional political pressure put on the Home Secretary to be seen to be doing something, he could demand a White Paper at short notice. If we have not by then reached agreement with Hong Kong, I can foresee the possibility of an imposed solution which Hong Kong might not like. It is therefore important for us to act swiftly in obtaining Ministerial approval of an agreed line after Mr Clift's return and, in going back to Hong Kong again, impress on them that this has become a matter of some urgency.

28 February 1980

Agray

A V E Gray NTD

CONFIDENTIAL