TNAG-1025-FCO40-1275-Visit-by-Lord-Carrington--Secretary-of-State-for-Foreign-and-1981 — Page 20

GR 400

Original at: NKK 340

Thi: Copy for:

Information only/ActionCONFIDENTIAL

Para(s)

CONFIDENTIAL

DESKBY 381000Z

HICK RECEIVED

3421 UTY MO. S

30 MAR 1981

62B

1172

DEKK OLAGER

INDEX

PA

REISTIN Acton Takej

FM HONG KONG 380618Z MAR 81

TO IMMEDIATE F C O

Sex 620

TELEGRAM NUMBER 351 OF 30 MARCH

NICK 0262

RECAVID IN REGISTRY NO. 5]

FOLLOWING FROM PRIVATE SECRETARY TO SECRETARY OF STATE 13 APR 1951 FOR DONALD AND CLIFT

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

PA

REGISTRY

Action Taken

NATIONALITY BILL

مل

$22.4.

1. SIR S Y CHUNG CALLED ON LORD CARRINGTON THIS MORNING. THE POSSIBILITY OF FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONALITY BILL INEVITABLY

CAME UP. SIR S Y CHUNG MADE A STRONG PITCH FOR A CHANGE IN THE NOMENCLATURE.

cery war

MR IGN'T

2. CHUNG ARGUED THAT THE BILL WOULD MAKE LIFE DIFFICULT FOR CBDTS WHEN TRAVELLING OVERSEAS BY MAKING THEIR NATIONALITY LESS RATHER THAN MORE CLEAR. HE ACCEPTED THAT THERE WAS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN NATIONALITY AND CITIZENSHIP AND THAT WE HAD UNDERSTANDABLY DECIDED

TO LABEL THOSE WITH THE RIGHT OF ABODE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AS ''BRITISH CITIZENS'' AND TO USE A DIFFERENT TITLE FOR THOSE WITH THE RIGHT OF ABODE ELSEWHERE. BUT SINCE WE WERE ALL AGREED THAT CBDTS WOULD REMAIN BRITISH NATIONALS, IN INTERNATIONAL LAW, (THE SECRETARY OF STATE HAD DRAWN ON FCO TELEGRAM 290 TO HONG KONG), CHUNG COULD NOT SEE WHY THE NOMENCLATURE SHOULD NOT MAKE THIS

EXPLICIT. HE ASKED WHAT ANSWER CBDTS WOULD HAVE TO GIVE IN THE

FUTURE TO THE QUESTION ABOUT NATIONALITY ON STANDARD IMMIGRATION

CARDS. THE TERM CBDT WOULD BE MEANINGLESS IN THAT CONTEXT. WOULD

· CBDTS CONTINUE TO REPLY THAT THEIR NATIONALITY WAS 'BRITISH'' (AS

WAS IN FACT THE POSITION)? IF SO, SHOULD THEIR PASSFORT NOT MAKE THIS CLEAR, AS IT DOES AT PRESENT. IN PLACE OF THE PRESENT ''BRITISH

SUBJECT: CITIZEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND COLONIES'' ON THE TITLE

PAGE OF A PASSPORT, WHY COULD WE NOT HAVE HENCEFORTH ''BRITISH NATIONAL : CBDT ETC (AS APPROPRIATE)''.

3. HAVING EXHAUSTED THE POINTS IN HIS BRIEF (NO 20, PARAGRAPH 4) 183

LORD CARRINGTON HAD DIFFICULTY IN REFUTING CHUNG'S EMINENTLY

LOGICAL LINE OF ARGUMENT. HE TOLD CHUNG FIRMLY THAT WE HAD FOUGHT

HARD FOR AMENDMENTS REQUESTED BY HONG KONG, WITH SOME SUCCESS (FOR

WHICH CHUNG WAS GRATEFUL), AND THAT THE HOME SECRETARY HAD EMPHASISED BOTH TO HIM AND TO THE GOVERNOR THAT THE HOME OFFICE WAS NOT PREPARED TO MAKE A FURTHER ADJUSTMENT TO THE NOMENCLATURE, WHICH IT REGARDED AS LYING AT THE HEART OF THE BILL. BUT, AS YOU WILL APPRECIATE, IT WAS HARD TO EXPLAIN TO CHUNG WHY HIS PROPOSAL

WOULD OFFEND AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF THE BILL.

CONFIDENTIAL

14.