consequences of current legislation, not the dependencies
We believe
10 as been fundamental to the Bill that
Is
there should be a distinctive citizenship for the UK itself with no possibility of confusion between that category and the other categories created by the Bill.
G But if it is acknowledged that they are nationals (at least for certain purposes) why not formally say so?
It is not a question simply of whether they may be regarded internationally as nationals in certain circumstances. There is no doubt that we would regard them as nationals in the sense that the UK would represent the interests of the dependencies everseas and Continue
internationally and dilomaki sepentane's to afford the consular assistance in exactly the same way as they do now. The problem is that there is no consensus internationally that this is all that flows from being a national.