TNAG-1081-FCO40-1331-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1981 — Page 86

CONFIDENTIAL

that have on the Government's backbenchers here? If this concession is to be made at

all, it may be thought best to keep it until a late stage in the Bill's proceedings.

9. A related proposal is that Crown Servants from the dependencies who come to

this country should be able to count their Crown Service towards part at least of the

residential requirement for naturalisation. This could be considered, although it

would be little more than a gesture.

10. A further proposal (which would subsume that in paragraph 9) is that, instead of having to apply for naturalisation, a citizen of the British Dependent Territories

should have an entitlement to registration after five years residence here if he is

then free of conditions. This would correspond to the provisions of the existing law, under which a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies who is not patrial becomes

patrial if settled here after five years ordinary residence. Home Office officials

would in fact welcome this, and there is a good case for saying that the provision

should also apply to British Overseas citizens. But there might be political

difficulties, similar to those which have arisen already over the concession on

transmission by people naturalised or registered, if a concession on these lines

were made.

11. A suggestion of major symbolic importance is that citizens from the

dependencies should be called British citizens, followed by the name of the dependency concerned, e.g. British citizen (Hong Kong). British citizenship in such a case woul i

not carry with it the right of abode. But this strikes at the very root of the airs

of the Bill and the proposal is in our view a non-starter. Even less of a starter is

the idea that citizens of the United Kingdom arid Colonies from Hong Kong should simply

become British citizens.

This

12. Finally, Hong Kong want the wives of British citizens to be entitled to

immediate registration if they are citizens of the British Dependent Territories.

seems unacceptable in view of the Government's general approach to sex equality in the

Bill.

One could not give the same right to husbands without unacceptable immigration

consequences. For similar reasons, Home Office Ministers have preferred denunciation

of the United Nations Convention on the Nationality of Married Women to allowing the

wives of British Overseas citizens to register as British Overseas citizens themselves.

6 March 1981

D H J HILARY