TNAG-1192-FCO40-1494-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1982 — Page 16

DSR 11C

compatible with our immigration legislation and practice. The

drawback is that these are more definitions of citizenship

than simple descriptions of nationality which would be arguably

more appropriate in an international travel document.

5.

If would be convenient to be able to confine any revised

description of nationality in passports to Hong Kong belongers.

But there are two reasons why this cannot be done. (i) Other

dependencies would demand to be included in any special

arrangement made for Hong Kong particularly as Gibraltarians

already are a favoured category and the Falkland Islanders

will become one if Lord Bruce of Donington's proposed Bill

succeeds. We could not easily explain to the remaining

་;

1

i

7

dependent territories in terms they would be likely to accept

that the revision we were prepared to make at Hong Kong's

request has no practical significance. And (ii) I would not

favour making an arrangement which could be misconstrued by

the Chinese government as having some special and exclusive

bearing on Hong Kong unwelcome to them in the context of

negotiations over its future.

1

1

3

Jard

If

6. This means that any provision for the description of

nationality in Hong Kong passports will have to extend at

least to the passports of the other dependent territories.

we do this an attempt could be made to push us further to

describe BOCs, BPPS and the residual British subjects as

British in their passports. If this were to happen we could

deploy the familiar argument that this could raise false hopes

in the immigration context, and reinforce it by pointing out

the distinction between passport holders who have a right of

abode in a particular dependent territory and those who have

none. But our position would be weak in logic and we might

be unable to prevent a revival of parliamentary interest in

/the

1