TNAG-1083-FCO40-1333-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1981 — Page 14

APS/Mr Luce

cc Mr Clift, HK&GD

HICK 340/1

RECEIVER CONFIDENTIMAY 1981

HONG KONG: NATIONALITY BILL

INDEX

PA

NO. 51

REGISTRY Action TakenN

Pao)

Mr War

Mr. Manice

руб

*

2+15

WOA

1. The submission from Hong Kong and General Department on introduction of the term British (or UK) National said (para 7) that NTD were against approaching the HO on the three approaches listed in para 6. This was incorrect. The purpose of my minute attached to the submission was to ensure that FCO Ministers were aware that the problems the proposal would cause for the UK were far more serious than the representations from Hong Kong would suggest. But I thought I had made it clear orally to HKGD that I realised that Ministers would probably feel that they must put the issue to the Home Office.

2.

This is of no importance now, except to the extent that it implies that I would be opposed to the approach at 6(b) of the submission - a Ministerial statement. Such a statement has already been made by Mr Luce with Hong Kong in mind. Such statements create problems in that they provoke further and more difficult questions involving eg BOC and the rights that stem from the status of 'national'. But NTD are not necessarily opposed in principle to a new statement on the right lines.

3.

RA

зат

(245)

As I explained in my note attached to the submission I am strongly opposed to the suggestion at 6(c) - use of the term British or UK national in passports but not in the Bill. Its use in passports is no less dangerous to HMG's interests than its use in the Bill.

7 May 1981

CONFIDENTIAL

W Jones

Nationality and Treaty Department