-G-1992 12:51
FCO M.V.D.
071 270 4046 P.06
follows:
(a) No-switching. No difficulty with this.
(b) Prior entry clearance, including by non-visa nationals: this would mainly affect Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians. MVD are strongly opposed. There would be resource implications (depending in part on how many non-visa WHMs currently choose to obtain prior entry clearance voluntarily basis. We know that some do). We do not accept the Home Office view that it would not be practical to introduce a ban on switching without also making prior entry clearance compulsory even for those who do not at present need it. SEAD are also strongly opposed, because this would be taken badly by the Malaysians, with a possible risk to UK exports;
(c) with one exception, described in para 8 below, the other proposed changes have been greeted without enthusiasm, but not seen as a particular problem.
8.
The exception is Australia.
Canberra have objected strongly
I
one
(Canberra telnos 440 and 443) to the reduction from two years to one year, and to the restrictions on those eligible for the scheme. It is however worth noting that two of the Home Office's proposed changes would result in UK practice being the same as current Australian practice towards British WHMs: year only, and single or childless married couples only. suspect that the Home Office would take a good deal of convincing that the damage to Australian/UK relations in changing from two years to one and reducing the age limits would be so severe as to justify abandoning changes which they see as necessary on immigration grounds, and which must of course be non-discriminatory. However, there is no need to adopt a