FEBAAO/3
CONFIDENTIAL
a)
UK legislation by Order in Council;
and
b) other devices which are either constitutionally improper or politically unfeasible.
Proceeding by Order in Council would remove all ambiguity and the constitutional proprieties would be respected.
Our Governors would be instructed to consult their governments, and inform them of what is proposed, while emphasising that under the Constitutions of those affected, Her Majesty has expressly reserved to herself powers to legislate for those territories by Order in Council. Similar powers to fulfil our responsibilities for good government in the territories have been invoked in the past, and the instrument is well understood by the local politicians.
>
4. Of the other options the most attractive would be to make our views know publicly to Governors and their DTs by means of an inspired written PQ and answer in Parliament. Governors would not formally be instructed to commute but would be able to take
account of HMG's views in deciding to commute. The Attorney General has however advised that this would amount to an improper interference with the Governors' discretion. Alternative options would be for me to go over the heads of Governors and advise HM The Queen to exercise the prerogative or for me to issue a formal
instruction to Governors to commute in all cases. But
these too would be constitutionally improper. Of the
miscellaneous legislative devices, none are satisfactory.
/Given
CONFIDENTIAL