TNAG-1379-FCO40-1827-Future-of-Hong-Kong-legislation-Hong-Kong-Bill-1985 — Page 50

CONFIDENTIAL

-

13

both from those who believe

we are doing too much for the people of

Hong Kong and from those who feel that HMG have done too little.

HMG is doing too much

is

to

The arguments of those who think we are doing too much are likely

centre on the retention of British nationality, and the benefits

that nationality carries with it. Some could argue that it

wrong

to perpetuate a situation in which persons who do not have the right

of

abode in the UK nevertheless hold a form of British nationality.

Others could argue that it is wrong for persons who derive their

British nationality from a connection with a Dependent Territory

continue to hold such nationality when that territory itself ceases

to be British. Still others might argue that the benefits to be

enjoyed by those who hold the new form of nationality should be

be far

less than those enjoyed by BDTCs.

to

to

Memorandum.

which HMG are

has been made clear to the Executive

a political commitment

Ministers will wish to rebut these arguments forcefully. They may

refer to the very great importance attached by Hong Kong people

the retention of their nationality status and to the clear

reassurance on this point already provided in the UK

That Memorandum represents

bound to uphold. Moreover it

Council of Hong Kong that

that the benefits of the new status will be the

same in all major respects as those now enjoyed by BDTCs, except for

the loss of transmissibility. There can be no going back on these

commitments.

Some Lords who think we are doing too much for the people of Hong

Kong may also try to write into the Bill an explicit provision that

the new form of nationality will not carry the right of abode in the

UK.

The UK

Memorandum makes it clear that

the right of abode in the UK.

so might be taken

Ministers may also

This is quite unnecessary.

the new form will not carry with it

There is no need to legislate on the point; to do

as a gratuitous insult in Hong Kong. Moreover

say that the powers in the Bill as drafted could

used to confer the right of

abode

in

the UK on

not subsequently be

BN(0) s.

This

is

because:

CONFIDENTIAL