TNAG-1382-FCO40-1830-Future-of-Hong-Kong-nationality-and-citizenship-1985 — Page 81

CODE 18-77 AWO Ltd. 7/84

3

Reference...

and real

7

yel. Th2

One

2.

Я

pe

21.

Hong Kong are right to point out that the Hong Kong Trade Development Council, and not the Hong Kong Tourist Board, have been designated under SI 1982/1710, made under section 16 of the 1981 Act. I agree therefore that this amendment should be made.

2J. As there is a gap of 14 years and six months between the commencement of the BNA 1981, (1 January 1983) and 1 July 1997, it is, I suppose, just possible that a person born after 1 January 1983 whose parent was a Hong Kong BDTC, could have a child before 1 July 1997. Perhaps the amendment should therefore not be made.

2K.

I think it is better to use the definition "relevant date", rather than having to repeat "1 July 1997" in the drafting of the Order. As a point of style, rather than substance.

2L.

But this

My comments on paragraphs 1A-C seem relevant here.

2M and N. I had previously been led to understand that there were political reasons emanating from Hong Kong whereby the use of references to applications for "registration" were not acceptable in the provision so I am surprised to see it used here. As regards leaving the cut-off dates to be decided later, I had previously understood that the object was to set out all the relevant provisions in the same Order so far as possible. Whatever dates are chosen, it would be wise to provide from the outset that the cut-off dates shall be not later than those envisaged in the

UK Memorandum.

20.

This provision was amended in our latest draft (15 March).

2P and Q.

be amended.

I agree that this Article will need to

I had presumed that the Home Office would

be working on a first draft.

The schedule prepared by the Home Office does amend these provisions. I am therefore not sure what Hong Kong intend.

15 April 1985

John Graigh

John Grainger Legal Advisers

C

Mr Buromo

Legal Adviser