TNAG-1189-FCO40-1491-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1982 — Page 198

HKK 340/1

Ник

Mr Howells NTD (CL537)

CONFIDENTIAL

AFZ817

ce Lord N Gordon Lennox

Mr Fearn SAMD

WIAD

SPD

SED

BRITISH CITIZENSHIP FOR ALL FALKLAND ISLANDERS?

(67)

1. Your minute of 23 July. From the Hong Kong point of view the proposed move would be extremely disadvantageous to HMG. The point is not that Hong Kong would oppose the granting of British citizen- ship to Falkland Islanders (you will recall that last year when this was under consideration in the Lords, Hong Kong would have welcomed the passage of an amendment on these lines in order to strengthen their own case). They would however react by demanding a similar concession for Hong Kong BDTCs (and for those of other Dependent Territories) on the following grounds:

Nemolves

2.

a) The concept of Dependent Territories citizenship would

have been complely breached. In the case of the Falkland Islands there would be no Community argument as there was with Gibraltar.

b) While they would not deny the Falkland Islanders' claim

to some special treatment in view of the conflict, people in Hong Kong would argue that this had been fully met by the concession allowing all Falkland Islanders

the right of entry and abode in the UK. (I do not think there is any likelihood of Hong Kong pressing for a similar right of abode concession for at present but as you are aware it will have been noted and could be quoted back if there were some emergency in Hong Kong in the future).

c) Hong Kong see themselves as loyal British subjects. Like the Cayman Islands, they have contributed to the South Atlantic Fund. Moreover, 6 Hong Kong seamen were killed in the Royal Fleet Auxiliaries or HM Ships. during the recent hostilities. Therefore any grant of UK citizenship to Falkland Islanders would be seen as racially discriminatory.

If Lord Bruce's bill were passed we could expect very considerable pressure both directly from Hong Kong and from the Hong Kong lobby in Parliament. I am sure that the Unofficial Members of the Executive and Legislative Councils would demand that the Governor put the case for similar treatment for Hong Kong in the strongest possible terms. They would probably argue that since BDTC was now meaningless the simplest thing would be to revert to CUKC for all.

26 July 1982

вчер

R D Clift

Hong Kong and General Department

CONFIDENTIAL