10.
CONFIDENTIAL
We also need to consider the format of the commentary. At present this is not in a form which would be suitable for publication with the draft Order itself. We need to consider whether it should in fact be published. Subject to Ministerial agreement, our view is that it would probably be helpful. If so, it will need to be recast in the kind of language that would be suitable for this.
11.
We also need to identify those areas which are likely to be points for substantive discussion by Parliament in the first debate. Clearly we shall want to put foward a draft in the form in which we would wish it eventually to appear, bu Parliament will expect to have a real opportunity to make some revisions to it. Two obvious areas in which Parliament might seek to make revisions are the definition of persons affected (on which we might offer the options as described above), and who, if any, should be excepted from loss. We should be glad to know if any other points strike you as likely to be debated in substance.
12. There are of course a large number of passport questions which do not fall to be dealt with in the Order. These will have to be considered pari passu with the drafting of the Order, its passage through Parliament, and the period between passage and introduction.
13.
Apart from substantive points, there may be a number of minor, purley legal drafting points which occur to your Legal Advisers. May we suggest, to save time, that your Legal Advisers discuss these direct with John Pakenham-Walsh? It might be possible to clear them quickly by telephone.
14. Finally, as to timing: the aim is to have the Order in place by April 1986. Working backwards, this suggests a final debate in January or February 1986, and a first debate around the end of October/beginning of November this year. To give time for printing etc. it would be helpful to get agreement all round by, say, the end of August/beginning of September. With this in mind, we suggest a meeting between us on 1 or 2 July (probably chaired by Mr Hyde). By then we may or may not finally settle what to do about "mixed" BDTCS. Subject to that and any other out- standing matters on which further work might need to be done, we hope that shortly after that meeting we should have a generally agreed draft to put to Hong Kong. Once Hong Kong has seen it, if they then consider it would be useful for them to come here and discuss it, we can arrange mutually convenient dates (taking into account various leave commitments during the summer).
15. We look forward to your comments on the draft and on the other matters mentioned above. I am copying this letter to colleagues here.
Yours sincerely
J P EMERY
Nationality Division.
- 3 -