TNAG-2367-FCO40-3440-British-Dependent-Territories-(British-Overseas-Territories)-1991 — Page 90

CONFIDENTIAL

6.

The Home Office have argued that the abolition could be

explained by some reference to the nationality package. We

see no logical connection (the two schemes cater for

entirely different groups of people) and believe that to

seek to make one would offend the Hong Kong community here

and, more importantly, would create the wrong impression of

the Government's intentions towards Hong Kong at a

sensitive time. The Department of Employment agree and are not prepared to recommend an announcement unless their Secretary of State is provided with a credible line to

take.

7. Against this background, officials have considered

whether it would be better to accept abolition of the whole

quota, phased over several years. This would:

(a) be consistent with the Government's immigration

policy;

(b) not discriminate against any Dependent Territory;

(c) enable the individuals and organisations concerned

to adapt to the change; and for Hong Kong put the terminal

date closer to 1997.

After lengthy discussions, we have persuaded the Department

of Employment and Home Office officials that, in return for

our agreeing to abolition of the whole quota, they would

recommend to their Ministers a generous phase-out period, of

nearly five years.

8. WIAD and the Governors of the six dependent territories

for which it is responsible could accept this approach.

They believe there are unlikely to be any political repercussions, provided that any publicity given to the decision is so phrased not to give grounds for assertions

BAGAFJ/3

CONFIDENTIAL

Page 90Page 91