Miss Marsden, HKD
Mars
Mr Minis
RM1/ нко 34024
CONFIDENTIAL
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
DESA
0 1 JUN 1990
CER
PA
Hong Kong Bill: Secretary of State's Wind-up
SONISTAY
Loût. Taken
The Secretary of State is assuming that he will wind-up the debate on 19 April for about 30 minutes. The first 15 minutes would be answering points raised during the debate. For the rest he would like a number of moveable building blocks which should include:
a. Some good actual examples (without names) of Hong Kong
Chinese who will stay put with the assurances we are offering.
b.
C.
d.
e.
1336
Other countries' efforts, especially Singapore, including the point that few people are actually leaving Hong Kong under these schemes.
Defensive points on the weak arguments:
what happens if a racket develops eg top jobs changing hands frequently to enable people to qualify for passports;
why not make passports conditional on staying put until 1997;
-
what is the relationship between 225,000 and 50,000;
the Indian community;
An analysis of Peking's attitute, which should be as robust as possible.
An attack (to be developed by Mr Lidington) on the Labour Front Bench record on immigration. All through the Secretary of State's time as Home Secretary Labour attacked all efforts to stop loopholes eg visas for India, Tamils v Kurds; carriers liability; primary purpose. Labour seemed anxious to erode effective immigration controls and yet now oppose a measure designed to help The Queen's subjects in Hong Kong to stay where they are etc, etc. "Divisive" is a meaningless term. Any points scheme divides the unsuccessful from the successful. Are Labour's own ideas not divisive? What do they mean? How many would they let in? Quote what Mr Hattersley said on the radio. Our scheme is a compromise between total exclusion and Mr Paddy Ashdown's preference, and has been criticised from both sides. It is also a proposal in principle, and none the worse for that.
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.