TNAG-1083-FCO40-1333-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1981 — Page 58

233

GPS 1000

CONFIDENTAL

234

CONFIDENTIAL

FM HONG KONG 241135Z APR 81

TO PRIORITY FCO

TELEGRAM NUMBER 443 OF 24 APRIL

TOP COPY

AKK 34011

INFO PRIORITY HONG KONG GOVT OFFICE LONDON RELAT

FOR YOUDE FROM GOVERNOR.

YOUR TELNO 399: NATIONALITY BILL.

RLOSTRY MO. ST

2/ APR1981

DEAK OFFICER

M.

INDEX

PA

RE ISTRY

I ACCEPTED THE PRIMARY NEED TO RESTORE PRACTICAL EROSIONS THE B

1.E. REGISTRATION AND CROWN SERVICE, THAT THESE TOOK PRIORITY OVER

NOMENCLATURE, AND THAT IF THEY WERE MET I WOULD BE SILENT ABOUT LATTER.

seeflo

2. BUT IN SPITE OF THE VALUE OF THE AMENDMENTS MADE (FOR WHICH I AM GRATEFUL) THE FEELING HAS GROWN HERE (FANNED BY VISITING OPPOSITION MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES) THAT THE BILL IS YET ANOTHER DIRTY

TRICK PLAYED ON HONG KONG. THIS IS NOT RELATED TO A DESIRE FOR ASYLUM OR A PROPOSAL TO UPSET THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMMONWEALTH IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1962, BUT TO A BELIEF THAT THE NEW NOMENCLATURE CREATES A NEW NATIONALITY OF REDUCED STATUS. THIS IS RESENTED BY THE NON-TRAVELLING PUBLIC AS A SLAP IN THE EYE, AND BY TRAVELLERS AS CARRYING PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR TREATMENT BY IMMIGRATION AUTHORITIES ( I HAVE MUCH SYMPATHY WITH BOTH POINTS). BOTH GROUPS COMBINE TO CALL FOR A NOMENCLATURE IN THE BILL THAT CONFIRMS THEIR CONTINUING BRITISH NATIONALITY AND CONSEQUENT CLAIM TO BRITISH PROTECTION ABROAD.

3. I HAVE FOUND IT HOPELESS TO EXPLAIN THAT THE BILL RELATES ONLY TO CITIZENSHIP AND THAT THIS IS A MATTER OF MUNICIPAL LAW RELATING

IS A MATTER OF TO ENTRY AND ABODE AND NOT TO NATIONALITY WHICH

INTERNATIONAL LAW. I MEET THE UNANSWERABLE QUERY **WHY THEN IS IT CALLED THE NATIONALITY BILL?''. THE FACT IS THAT THE TWO CONCEPTS OF CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY ARE HOPELESSLY CONFUSED AND I HAVE EVERY SYMPATHY WITH MR LUCE'S SLIP OF THE TONGUE. HOWEVER NOW THAT IT IS ON RECORD IT IS BEING USED TO ILLUSTRATE THE NEED TO CLEAR THIS UP, BECAUSE OF THE VERY SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS OF ANY MISUNDERSTANDING (AND THERE IS A VERY GREAT DEAL) ABOUT LOSS OF

BRITISH NATIONALITY.

4. I NOW REALISE THAT THIS CONCERN WITH NATIONALITY WAS WHAT LAY BEHIND UMELCO'S DESIRE FOR A NOMENCLATURE SUCH AS "BRITISH CITIZEN (HONG KONG)'', BECUASE THE ADJECTIVE BRITISH'' IMPLIED TO THEM CONTINUING BRITISH NATIONALITY. WHILE THEY DO NOT NOW WISH TO PRESS THIS NOMENCLATURE FURTHER AGAINST THE ADVICE OF THE S OF S, THEY HAVE REPRESENTED TO ME THAT AT LEAST THE BILL SHOULD CONTAIN A CLAUSE THAT WILL MAKE CLEAR THAT THEY (AND OTHERS) WILL REMAIN BRITISH NATIONALS. SEE PROPOSED DRAFT IN MIFT.

5. THIS WOULD INCLUDE IN THE BILL A STATEMENT OF A POSITION ALREADY CONFIRMED AS CORRECT IN FCOTEL NO 290. IT WOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IMMIGRATION IMPLICATIONS FOR THE UK AND, SINCE THE DIFFERENT

CONFIDENTAL

/ CITIZENSHIPS

146

9 00 00 0

ove isch a

dis

за