TNAG-1382-FCO40-1830-Future-of-Hong-Kong-nationality-and-citizenship-1985 — Page 210

GR 1750

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVE

FM HONG KONG 130745Z FEB 35

10/4

нии осно 040

J REGISTRY

12 FEB 1985

; PA

REGISTRY

Action Taken

138

TO PRIORITY FCO

TELEGRAM NUMBER 337 OF 13 FEBRUARY

INFO PRIORITY PEKING

36

63

YOUR TELNO 120, GALSWORTHY'S LETTER OF 14 JANUARY, AND HOARE'S LETTERS OF 17 AND 22 JANUARY: NATIONALITY: LEGISLATION.

(67

(46)

1. WE ARE NOT (NOT) ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE USE OF HONG KONG

BELONGER STATUS AS A MEANS OF DEFINING BDTCS BY VIRTUE OF A

CONNECTION WITH HONG KONG. AS POINTED OUT IN PARA 1 OF OUR TELNO 144, OUR CURRENT DEFINITIONS OF HONG KONG BELONGER UNDER THE IMMIGRATION ORDINANCE DO NOT (NOT) COVER ALL BDTCS WITH A CLOSE PERSONAL CONNECTION WITH HONG KONG AND WHO SHOULD BE COVERED BY THE DEFINITION OF HONG KONG BDTCS IN THE ORDER-IN-COUNCIL. ANOTHER OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE TERM HONG KONG BELONGER IN THE ORDER-IN-COUNCIL IS THAT, DURING DISCUSSION OF THE NATIONALITY TEXT IN THE AD HOC GROUP ON 27 AUGUST 1984, LU PING ARGUED THAT CURRENT HONG KONG LEGISLATION REGARDING HONG KONG BELONGER STATUS

MENTS'

CONFLICTED WITH THE CHINESE POSITION ON FUTURE ARRANGE-

AND HAD COLONIAL IMPLICATIONS AND WAS INAPPROPRIATE

FOR THE FUTURE'' (PARA 14 OF PEKING TELNO 1931 OF 27 AUGUST 1334). WE RECOGNISE THAT LU'S ARGUMENT REFERRED TO THE DEFINITION OF WHO SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT OF ABODE IN THE FUTURE HONG KONG SAR, AND THAT HIS OBJECTIONS NEED NOT NECESSARILY APPLY TO A REFERENCE

IN UK LEGISLATION TO HONG KONG BELONGER STATUS. NEVERTHELESS,

GIVEN THAT THE EFFECTS OF THE ORDER-IN-COUNCIL ON NATIONALITY ARE

TO EXTEND WELL BEYOND 1997, IT SEEMS PRUDENT TO AVOID, IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, THE USE OF A TERM TO WHICH THE PRCG HAVE RAISED SPECIFIC

OBJECTIONS.

2. WE AGREE WITH GRAINGER AND HILL THAT A NEATER APPROACH APPEARS TO LIE IN DEFINING BDTCS BY VIRTUE OF A CONNECTION WITH HONG KONG:

(A) IN TERMS OF UK LEGISLATION RATHER THAN THE HONG KONG IMMIGRATION

ORDINANCE: AND

(3) BY REFERENCE TO A RANGE OF QUALIFYING CONNECTIONS WITH HONG

KONG (ALONG THE LINES OF PARA 7 OF HILL'S MINUTE). THIS WOULD

BE MORE EASILY COMPREHENSIBLE TO LAYMEN AND REDUCES THE RISK

OF OMITTING RELEVANT CATEGORIES.

3. AS REGARDS A SAVING CLAUSE FOR SEPARATE BDTCS AND MIXED BDTCS,

IF A POLICY DECISION IS TAKEN THAT BDTCS WITH A CLOSE PERSONAL

CONNECTION WITH HONG KONG SHOULD LOSE THEIR BDTCSHIPS, IT WOULD

SEEM LOGICAL TO EXCLUDE FROM LOSS OF BDTCSHIP SEPARATE BDTCS

WHO DERIVE THEIR CITIZENSHIP THROUGH A TOTALLY SEPARATE ROUTE

NOT USING HONG KONG, AND ANY PERSON BORN, ADOPTED, NATURALISED

CONFIDENTIAL

/ OR

Page 210Page 211