3.
The arguments for and against a change in the Rule are those given by the Select Committee and
those in FCO telno 282 to Canberra. The number
of people accepted for settlement under this concession rose again last year to over 4,000, and this number does not include dependents. Retention of this rule would be harder to justify if the New Nationality Law, as at present planned, limits transmission of citizenship to the first generation born in foreign countries and if the right of abode is restricted accordingly. These arguments suggest that if the rule is to go, it should go now rather
than later.
What
Home
4. The Home Office obviously do not expect the Governments concerned to welcome the change. they would like is an indication of what the Governments a public attitude to it will be. Office Ministers will be hoping for some sort of assurance or indication that the Governments will nnt raise formal objections or publicly criticise the change. It may not be easy to get such an
apewne bat As you may know in 1972, some Conservative MPs voted with the Labour opposition against the Immigration Rules then tabled because they did not regard them as adequately recognising connections with the Old Commonwealth, and it was this that led to the introduction of the present rule. The likely reaction to the withdrawal of the rule now could be a important consideration.
5, In approaching the Government you should stress that the review of the Immigration Rules is a highly sensitive subject here and that it is
most important that this consultation be treated as Confidential. You may say that the Government has been consulted at an early stage so that their views can be taken properly into account. Further consideration and consultation will be necessary in London, and there are certain other important factors to be taken into account, and there is no
question of a final decision having already been taken to do away with the UK ancestry provisions.
5
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN