CONFIDENTIAL
But
(b) Nationality, as argued above, could be dealt with by an enabling clause allowing later subordinate legislation. Provisions on nationality are usually set out in detail in Independence Acts. in the Cyprus Act 1960 this was left to be done by Order in Council, subject only to annulment procedures in Parliament. There is therefore a precedent for procedures for annulment only in this field. However substantive provisions on nationality may be of such Parliamentary interest that pressure for a full affirmative procedure ie prior approval by both Houses of the Orders in Council in draft, at least on the matter of nationality, would be difficult to resist. It could be explained that the nationality provisions would be left to Orders in Council because they involve detailed drafting which would delay the Bill.
(c) Modifications of UK statutes in preparation for or on the ending of sovereignty and the lease would be dealt with within the Bill by enabling clauses allowing the detailed provisions to be made by order-in-council, or in certain cases, eg shipping, by Hong Kong legislation. Such orders in council in accordance with precedent, could unless Parliamentary pressures proved inevitable be subject only to negative procedure, ie subject to annulment. Some of these modifications of statutes on termination of sovereignty cannot be definitively settled now since they depend on the status of UK legislation in 1997.
(d) The point about privileges and immunities could be dealt with
by a short clause to the effect that the members of the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group nominated by the Government of the People's Republic of China will enjoy the like privileges and immunities as are accorded to diplomatic agents by the Diplomatic Privileges Act
1964.
THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL
8.
Parliament will have been given an opportunity to debate the agreement in December: and it is hoped that there will not be any great difficulties in the Bill's passage through Parliament early in 1985. This issue is however a sensitive one and it is not possible to rule out some repetition of previous controversy, particularly on
CONFIDENTIAL