British National (Overseas) should be given infinite leave to remain, right of abode, or British citizenship sign now

This petition is for British National (Overseas) to be given infinite leave to remain, right of abode, or British citizenship.

Hong Kong was under British rule for 150 years. Hong Kong was British soil; it was part of the United Kingdom as a British overseas territory. In most minds of the people of Hong Kong who were born there, they considered themselves British, not Chinese. They were not born in China; they were born on British soil. During the talks in 1982 with China about the future of Hong Kong, the people were hoping Hong Kong would remain British. The reason that the people of Hong Kong is more British than Chinese is that 150 years of British rule has change Hong Kong and its way of life. When the British first established Hong Kong as a colony, it was just a fishery port. Under 150 years of British rule, it has brought tremendous influence to the colony of Hong Kong that there is a big separation gap from the Chinese. The people of Hong Kong and way of life are westernized with British influence. The Queen is always like a step mother to the people of Hong Kong. English was an official language spoken, written, and read in Hong Kong. When people have to name the symbols of Hong Kong, it would be the union flag, double decker bus, the lion, and the red pillar post box. Hong Kong remained a capitalist outpost who believed in free market. English common law was used in Hong Kong. The major banks and companies established in Hong Kong were British such as HSBC, Standard Charter, Swire, and Jardine. It goes to say that the businesses founded in Hong Kong has a relationship in the UK as HSBC is one of the five major banks that did not bankrupt during the recession and the Swire Company is in the UK stock market. The people of Hong Kong supported the Westminster government. They would go to such length to support the British government that in 1982 an estimate of 10 million pounds was given by the Hong Kong government to Britain for the Falklands War. The people of Hong Kong worked hard to keep Hong Kong and its British colonial culture alive. They helped and made British companies grew into a global position. They seclude themselves from China as they know they are different to them. They weren't Chinese, they were British.

But what return has the British brought to the people of Hong Kong. They betrayed the trust the people of Hong Kong had on the United Kingdom. The people of Hong Kong felt betrayed. During decolonisation colonies were demanding for independence, while Hong Kong loyal to the British rule, never even question about independence. This showed how the people of Hong Kong do not consider themselves a national races but British. Further on, when it came to a poll should 'Hong Kong be returned to China?' No one in Hong Kong want to revert back to Chinese rule as British rule was great. But during the talks in 1982, the people in Hong Kong had no say in it the question of sovereignty of Hong Kong and the talks concluded with the handover of Hong Kong in 1997.

What was even more devastating was the British desertion to the people of Hong Kong. In the British Nationality Act 1981, the British government restricted the movement of British Nationals by creating a new national status as the British Dependent Territory Citizen which British Nationals in Hong Kong no longer have a right of abode in the UK. What is odd about this is why the act was it created. Most British overseas territories had small population in which restriction of movement should not be needed but Hong Kong had a large ethnically 'yellow' population, which the act could be justify as a racial issue. Further on in the Hong Kong Act 1985, the British Dependent Territory Citizen status would be abolished with the transfer of Hong Kong but the people had a chose in staying British with a new class in the British Nationality which is called the 'British National (Overseas).' The British National (Overseas) had no right of abode or any rights as a British except consular services overseas. It only gave the people in 'title' as British. Even though the status was purely 'anomalous' in the history of British Nationality Law as Lord Goldsmith put it in his Citizenship Review in 2008. Out of the population of 5 million in Hong Kong at the time, 3.3 million of the people register to become British National (Overseas), showing their national pride as being British. No matter how the British government betrayed the people of Hong Kong, deep down inside the heart of the people they know in fact they are not Chinese but British. 3.3 million Of those people were mostly born in Hong Kong while the other 2 million people were mostly immigrants from China.

The British National Overseas could be seen as racial discriminative, as most people who hold it are ethnically 'yellow.' But what is also upsetting about it, next door to Hong Kong was the former colony of Macau. The Portuguese never segregated the people of Macau; they were given full Portuguese citizenship as the Portuguese treat the people of Macau as their own. While the British government claim to protect the interest of the people of Hong Kong, they clearly do not. China because of its government will bring so much uncertainty for the future of the people of Hong Kong, like the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989. How can the British government leave the people of Hong Kong to a communist regime while the people of Hong Kong are democratic and capitalist? Because Britain did not grant the people of Hong Kong, the people had to fend for themselves. To continued their existing British culture and lifestyle, they fled to the Commonwealth realms which they open arms towards the people of Hong Kong. Mass migration started in which the people of Hong Kong immigrated to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, and Belize, while the British betrayed its people in Hong Kong by closing their doors towards them.

Some people are concerned that granting the right of abode to 3.3 million people of Hong Kong to the United Kingdom. The concern is how Britain is going to settle 3.3 million people of Hong Kong in Britain. But one must think, would 3.3 million people settle in Britain? In Macau situation, it showed only a small number of people immigrated to Portugal. One reason is the economic prosperous in Hong Kong encouraged some people to stay in Hong Kong. While family members who settled in the Commonwealth Realms encourage fellow people of Hong Kong to immigrate there. Plus it is a advantage for the British economy as well for the ones who does immigrate. Most people in Hong Kong average income and wealth is above the United Kingdoms. The people of Hong Kong are not poor or homeless. They have sustainable amounts of wealth. If they do come to the UK, all they would do is boast the UK housing market and the government revenue. The UK government will have an extra 3.3 million taxpayers for the economy while for the services sector would have 3.3 million more customers. Compare to immigration during the 1950s and 1960s, 3.3 million is consider a small amount. Therefore it shows how the UK government underestimate the people of Hong Kong but also they do not protect their interest but look down upon them. In the modern times, as things are settle between the United Kingdom and China with the transfer of Hong Kong and the people of Hong Kong either stayed in Hong Kong or settled somewhere else, shouldn't they at least be given the rights as a British citizen, or at least right of abode? Most people of Hong Kong are pretty settled in where they are in the modern time. It is a sure thing that 3.3 million people would not just suddenly immigrate to the UK in the modern times. The British government should not worry the influx of British National (Overseas) to the United Kingdom as it is highly unlikely they would come here and settled. One might ask then why should British National (Overseas) have a right of abode? Like any other British-born on British soil, it is a right that all British alike must have the right of abode to their own nations. It is the basic right of any nationals in any nation to have the right of abode. Therefore those 3.3 million people of Hong Kong, who are British National (Overseas) and are British but ethnically 'yellow' must have the right of abode of their nation. The current status of a British National (Overseas) only gives the people in 'title' as British but they are practical stateless as they don't have a right of abode to their nation which is the United Kingdom.

There are so many ways to defend why British National (Overseas) should be given infinite leave to remain, right of abode, or British citizenship. But the bottom line is that the people of Hong Kong are born on British soil, they lived under British rule, and they know they are British. So what would the difference be for a person being born in the United Kingdom to one being born in Hong Kong before 1997? Both were born on British soil and are British. Why should the person born in the United Kingdom be a British citizen and a person being born in Hong Kong be a British in 'title' but not have the rights as a citizen of its nation? Why should a British born in the United Kingdom have a right of abode and a British born in Hong Kong before the handover do not?

I hope the British government would reconcile and reflect upon the wrong actions and doings they have done to the people of Hong Kong who are British National (Overseas). I hope they can reflect upon this and give infinite leave to remain, right of abode, or British citizenship to the British National (Overseas) which rightfully they deserve and belong to them. But if not they should at least allow British National (Overseas) to register infinite leave to remain, right of abode, or British citizenship without any prerequisites. Or they can allow British National (Overseas) to settle in the UK without any immigration restriction and allow them to settle here indefinite and then they can register as a British citizen when they resided here for 5 years. I hope you would sign my petition for the cause and thank you for reading this. Below there are articles and news report of the same issue I have been talking about by different people and their views on it.

News reports and articles that has been flowing around during the handover to now about this issue:

The Economist criticised that "the failure to offer citizenship to most of Hong Kong’s residents was shameful", and "it was the height of cynicism to hand 6m people over to a regime of proven brutality without allowing them any means to move elsewhere." The article also stated that the real reason that the new Labour government still refused to give full British citizenship to other British Dependent Territories Citizens in around 1997 because the UK waited until Hong Kong had been disposed of “would be seen as highly cynical”, as Baroness Symons, a Foreign Office minister, has conceded. ("Britain’s colonial obligations", 3 July 1997, The Economist).

Jack Straw, then the Shadow Home Secretary said in a letter to the then Home Secretary Michael Howard dated 30 January 1997 that "common sense and common humanity demand that we give these people full British citizenship. The limbo in which they will find themselves in July arises directly from the agreements which Britain made with China". He further stated that a claim that British National (Overseas) status amounts to British nationality "is pure sophistry".

The legislative councillor Dr. Henrietta Ip criticized the idea of British National (Overseas) and again urged the UK Parliament, to grant full British citizenship to Hong Kong's British nationals in the council meeting held on 5 July 1989, saying that: "we were born and live under British rule on British land.... It is therefore... our right to ask that you should give us back a place of abode so that we can continue to live under British rule on British land if we so wish.... I represent most of all those who live here to firmly request and demand you to grant us the right to full British citizenship so that we can, if we so wish, live in the United Kingdom, our Motherland...In fact, your resistance to granting us full citizenship and the right of abode in the United Kingdom reflects your doubt about the Joint Declaration. Yet the more you lack confidence in it, the stronger is the reason why you should grant us full citizenship to protect us from communist rule... I say to you that the right of abode in the United Kingdom is the best and the only definitive guarantee.... With your failure to give us such a guarantee, reluctant as I may, I must advise the people of Hong Kong, and urgently now, each to seek for themselves a home of last resort even if they have to leave to do so. I do so because, as a legislator, my duty is with the people first and the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong second, although the two are so interdependent on each other...."

Ann Dummett, an expert in this area, criticised that "There is no indication at all in our nationality law of ethnic origin being a criterion. But the purpose of the law since 1981, and the manner in which it is implemented, make sure that ethnic origin is in fact and in practice a deciding factor.", Letter to Franco FRATTINI, Standing committee of experts on international immigration, refugee and criminal law. Date: 25 September 2006. Ms Dummett also said that the 1981 Nationality Act in effect gave full British citizenship to a group of whom at least 96% are white people, and the other, less favourable forms of British nationality to groups who are at least 98% non-white.Lack of basic human rights in the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Bill, BritishHongKong

In March 1996, there was a submission to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination of United Nations. The committee criticised the arrangements of the BN(O) nationality under "Principal subjects of concern": The Government's statement that South Asian residents of Hong Kong are granted some form of British nationality, whether that of a British National Overseas (BNO) or a British Overseas Citizen (BOC), so that no resident of Hong Kong would be left stateless following the transfer of sovereignty is noted with interest. It is, however, a matter of concern that such status does not grant the bearer the right of abode in the United Kingdom and contrasts with the full citizenship status conferred upon a predominantly white population living in another dependent territory. It is noted that most of the persons holding BNO or BOC status are Asians and that judgements on applications for citizenship appear to vary according to the country of origin, which leads to the assumption that this practice reveals elements of racial discrimination. Concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 28/03/96.

The legislation is sometimes compared with Macau, a former colony of Portugal, where many residents of Chinese descent were granted right of abode in Portugal when Macau was still under colonial rule. They were not deprived of their right of abode after the transfer of sovereignty of Macau in 1999, their Portuguese passports and citizenship are valid and inheritable, and it turned out that many of them still choose to stay in Macau.

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in, otherwise register an account for free then sign the petition filling the fields below.
Email and the password will be your account data, you will be able to sign other petitions after logging in.

Privacy in the search engines? You can use a nickname:

Attention, the email address you supply must be valid in order to validate the signature, otherwise it will be deleted.

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Shoutbox

Who signed this petition saw these petitions too:

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook
OR

If you already have an account please sign in

Comment

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

Goal
18 / 50

Latest Signatures

  • 25 November 201618. Leung Andrew
    I support this petition
  • 25 November 201617. bytfung
    I support this petition
  • 24 November 201616. tostream (unverified)
    I support this petition
  • 22 November 201615. Myk Siu
    I support this petition
  • 22 November 201614. shing927 (unverified)
    I support this petition
  • 22 November 201613. Jacobhk (unverified)
    I support this petition
  • 22 November 201612. steve steve
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 201611. Mug Red
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 201610. Rickychu (unverified)
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 20169. JackCHK
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 20168. HLTang (unverified)
    We born as British so UK right of adobe is our right.
  • 21 November 20167. LouisaRaharja
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 20166. Vick Lam
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 20165. Gigi Weng
    I support this petition
  • 21 November 20164. Raphael Leung
    I support this petition
  • 28 October 20153. Ho Yin Lau (unverified)
    I strongly support this petition
  • 17 August 20112. Lyn Smith
    I support this petition
  • 11 August 20111. Ronald Pickersgill
    I support this petition

Information

Tags

british, british national overseas, british nationality, hong kong, right of abode

Share

Invite friends from your address book

Embed Codes

direct link

link for html

link for forum without title

link for forum with title

Widgets