TNAG-1561-FCO40-2125-Future-of-Hong-Kong-nationality-and-passports-Hong-Kong-(Br-1986 — Page 215

Council of Hongkong Indian Associations

Contd. 4

3.

It was stated that to acquiesce in our demands would suggest to the PRC "a lack of confidence in the Sino-British Agreement" (Hansard 1305). There are, however, strong indications in those organs of the Chinese press in Hong Kong which are known to reflect the thinking of the PRC, that the ethnic minorities are properly a British responsibility, and that our claims are well founded. We enclose as evidence of that attitude both before and after the Parliamentary debates extracts from Wen Wei Pao of 7th January 1986, and Ta Kung Po of 18th January 1986 (together with translations). We can confirm from our own discussions with Mr. Li Chu Wen, Vice-Director of Xinhua News Agency, and Ji Shaoxiang, Deputy Head of Foreign Affairs Department of that Agency, which took place on 31st December 1985 that it is indeed the view of the PRC that it is for HMG, and not the PRC, to provide an effective citizenship for the minorities. accept that this is indeed the attitude of the PRC? upon what evidence does HMG discern a contrary attitude? in particular, upon what evidence does HMG rely to justify its assertion that the PRC would regard acquiescence in our claims as indicating a lack of confidence in the Sino-British Agreement?

4.

Does HMG If not,

And,

Reference was made to the "knock-on effect" if our claims were met. (Hansard 1275). It is not completely clear to what this refers.

If it is meant to imply that other Chinese BDTCS might seek to advance claims to British citizenship, if it were accorded to Hong Kong Indians, it is ill-founded (see Briefing Paper, para. 5).

The debates in the Legislative Council clearly indicated that, as is indeed the case, there are material differences between the situations of the ethnic Chinese and the non-ethnic Chinese minorities, which justified different treatment by HMG. This was expressly stated, inter alia, in the speeches of the Hon. Thomas Clydesdale, Allen Lee and Martin Lee. This factor, too, lays to rest an argument, relied on at earlier stages by, but not apparently repeated by HMG in the debates in Parliament, that to acquiesce in our demands would cause resentment among

Does HMG Chinese BDTCs. The evidence now points the other way. accept that this point is a false one, and that, as we assert, how can HMG the evidence does now point the other way? If so, properly rely upon an alleged "knock-on effect" to justify refusal of our demands?

If, however, the so called "knock-on effect" is intended to refer to the fact that to make concessions to any group of aspirants to British citizenship would invite like claims, which

Contd./