CONFIDENTIAL
December
and
a number of firms have shown an interest in participating. The key question is about numbers. Annex A shows that HKG want only 300 (if any) places to be offered clearly a grudging if not derisory figure. It is difficult to assess likely demand on the basis of interviews with a small number of firms, but if Ministers were inclined to proceed at all, the choice would seem to lie between 500 and 1,000, on the basis that either could be seen as a sufficiently substantial gesture. (The final figure might be influenced by whether the Garrison and other British institutions wish to be involved.) I should report, however, that officials, without sharing the Governor's repugnance, have no great enthusiasm for continuing with a scheme which has lost its original rationale, could not apply to more than a small minority, and yet would require complicating provisions on the face of the Bill. Perhaps crucial here is the Foreign Secretary's own view if the Home Secretary himself does not feel strongly?
The Garrison
21.
The Defence Secretary has asked for 2,000 places under the citizenship scheme for locally engaged staff. Our view is that it would be inappropriate, and inconsistent with the purposes of the citizenship scheme, to cater specifically for Garrison staff in this way, and we suggest that they should take their chances in the scheme along with other Hong Kong people. We had hoped to explore with MOD more fully at official level other possible ways of meeting the Garrison's needs, whether by finding other means of reassuring locally engaged staff about their future or identifying alternative means of carrying out their functions (for example by contracting out). Unfortunately, we have been unable to take these discussions as far as we had hoped. Rather than delay OD(K) discussion, we suggest that OD (K) should be invited to agree that this matter should be pursued bilaterally between the Home Secretary and the Defence Secretary.
Eligibility
22.
We propose that the citizenship scheme should be open to BDTCS, BN (O)s, other British nationals with no conditions on their stay in Hong Kong, and Certificate of Identity (COI) holders and others who have submitted applications for BDTC status before a specified date.
23. Our purpose in including COI holders as suggested above is to avoid penalising those who have submitted applications for BDTC status, but not yet had them processed. One possible cut off date would be the date of publication of the Bill. However, antagonism would be caused by announcing a cut off date which had already passed, and this would make it more difficult for HKG to secure a reasonable reception in Hong Kong for the Bill. We therefore suggest that the cut off should be the date of enactment. This may cause a rush in applications for BDTC status
CONFIDENTIAL
7
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.