TNAG-2665-FCO40-3862-Future-of-Hong-Kong-transfer-of-UK-related-records-regarding-1992 — Page 11

4

CONFIDENTIAL

6

8.

be

To

We therefore propose that only the records mentioned at para. 4, 5 and, probably, 6 above returned to the HMG upon the change of government. this end, I would be grateful for your advice as to :-

(a)

whether our proposal is you,

acceptable to

(b)

if the answer to (a) is yes,

(i) whether the records

in paper form

2(d) (iii),

as listed in paras. 2(b) (i), 2(c), 2 (d) (ii), 2(e) (i)

2(f),

(ii),

2 (g) (i)

-

(unclassified

destroyed before the

(iii), 2 (h)

ones)

and 2 (j)

can

changeover,

be

and

9.

(ii) how the rest of the

The

UK-related

records in microjacket form as listed in

paras. 2 (b) (i), 2(c), 2 (d) (ii), 2 (d) (iii), 2(e), 2 (£), 2 (g) (i)

(iii) and 2 (h) are to be disposed of in 1997, i.e. whether they can be handed over to the HK SAR government together with other non-UK-related records in the mixed pool or be segregated for destruction before the handing (As I have mentioned segregation of these in microjacket form requires a lot of manpower and other resources.)

over. earlier, records

other point that I would like to raise is that, as the authority for registration of a declaration of renunciation as a BN (0) registrants is rested with the Secretary of State, whether a duplicate register (in computer print-out form) will need to be generated and forwarded to the UK renunciation applications

posts after 1997.

to

facilitate their process of referred from British overseas We do not envisage much problem in

producing such a duplicate register.

FCOL-2

31.10.1991

CONFIDENTIAL