CODE 18-77
Mr Burrows
M.
Mr. P feel.
ли
THE HONG KONG BILL
Reference
CONFIDENTIAL
There shd be no
in finalining By
difficulty in
the shinchios
Zu
ино
Jai
HKCK 040/53
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
0 5 NOV 1984
DESK OFFICER
INDEX
in
31
RisTY
Action Laxen
61
1. Sir G Engle, First Parliamentary Counsel, telephoned me again today.
2. His first point was that he had seen a letter from the Home Secretary suggesting that the nationality provision in the Bill should be a qualified power. This would say that Orders could be made for stated objects, removing Hong Kong from the lists in nationality legislation, withdrawing the DTC status from a class of persons connected with Hong Kong and conferring on them a new status to be defined. He wanted us to know that this seemed to him a possible form of legislation, which was capable of being drafted, though it was a matter of policy whether the legislation should take this form.
3.
He pointed out that, whether the legislation took this form or a more general power, it would have to provide for dealing with the incidents of nationality throughout British legislation i.e. indicating the implications for other British legislation of the change of status which would result from the exercise of powers in the Bill.
His impression was that the solution would
be more or less to equate persons enjoying this new status to British Overseas Citizens.
4. I confirmed that the legislation would take the form previously envisaged, covering transfer of sovereignty, nationality, adaptation of statutes and privileges and immunities, and that the timetable was, assessment during November, Parliamentary debate in December, and introduction of the Bill in January.
5.
He asked when he might hope to receive Instructions. I said that the substance of the Bill was still not finally decided, particularly on nationality, and I could not do more than pass on his wish to have Instructions soon. He pointed out that Christmas must be taken into account. As a final request he asked for a copy of the documents constituting the Agreement and the Memorandum on Nationality; which you kindly promised to send to him.
6.
He said he did not know whether he would handle the Bill himself or ask another Counsel to do so. It would depend on the balance of work time.
·
7. Subsequently you and I discussed this briefly. It is obviously difficult to finalise the Instructions, while open points of policy remain. On the other hand if the Instructions are only sent at the end of November, it is quite likely that this will not leave enough time to go back to Counsel if, as is wished, the first draft requires some modification.
8. Finally, I decided to take the call, since I know enough about the matter to pass on Sir G Engle's comments and I am not sure how responsibility for the Bill will in fact be divided between yourself and Mr Fifoot. This is a matter which is normally indicated in the last paragraph of the Instructions.
CONFIDENTIAL
On the
/next