TNAG-1559-FCO40-2123-Future-of-Hong-Kong-nationality-and-passports-Hong-Kong-(Br-1986 — Page 12

E.R

The Powellen Was Gabristety

VOIR

217

N

Mo

na

NOTE OF A MEETING HELD ON WEDNESDAY, 15 JANUARY 1986 AT HOME OFFICE, QAG

Present:

Mr Waddington

ми TID

Mr L Narain, Council of Hong Kong

Mr Renton

Mr Lyon

Mr Westmacott, FCO

Mr Hudson

Mr Sital,

Indian Associations

Council of Hong Kong Indian Associations

1.

Mr Waddington said that he and Mr Renton were very glad to have this opportunity to hear at first hand the views and concerns of the non-ethnic Chinese community in Hong Kong. His aim at the meeting and in the debates in Parliament was to listen to the views expressed but, in fairness to everyone, also to make clear any difficulties which particular proposals might

create.

2. Mr Narain and Mr Sital explained that the non-ethnic Chinese community was worried about its security after 1997 and only the British Government could allay their fears. The non-ethnic Chinese community was a special case. Hong Kong was not being given its independence, it was being given back to another country. If it were being given independence, Mr Narain and Mr Sital would be happy to become citzens of Hong Kong. BDTCS of Chinese ethnicity would automatically acquire Chinese nationality but recent discussions which Mr Narain had had with the Chinese authorities suggested that they regard the non-ethnic Chinese as a British responsibility and that they were unlikely to be granted Chinese citizenship. The non-ethnic Chinese community did not want

to come to the United Kingdom and it was acknowledged that the Joint Declaration guaranteed their right of abode in Hong Kong. But if life became intolerable in Hong Kong they would have nowhere else to go. The British Government, it was claimed, had a moral obligation to ensure the security of the non-ethnic Chinese community by granting them British citizenship. The ethnic Chinese community in Hong Kong itself now recognised their fears and supported this claim for special treatment.

3. The difficulties of granting British citizenship were discussed. If the objective was to allay fears about their security in Hong Kong, British citizenship was of no avail. The right of abode in Hong Kong was guaranteed by the Joint Declaration and to grant British citizenship would also indicate little confidence in the undertakings given by the Chinese Government. Because of the restrictions on transmitting British citizenship to children born abroad, it would not benefit future generations any more than the present proposals. If the heart of the matter was that the non-ethnic Chinese community wanted somewhere else to go in the event that life in Hong Kong after 1997 was not to their liking, then a similar case could be made by all three and a quarter million Hong Kong BDTCs.

4.

But that apart, to grant British citizenship to people whose connections and roots were in Hong Kong would be inconsistent with the fundamental principle of the Government's nationality policy enshrined in the British Nationality Act 1981. It would also be incompatible with a firm and fair immigration control. The Government was not aware of the Chinese authorities previously having said that they regarded the non-ethnic Chinese as a British responsibility. It had

AKK evoly

RECEIVED IN RECISTAY

31 JAN 1986

/cont...

دیا