XN000022-1985-01-22 — Page 23

5

|

SIR GEOFFREY: I THINK THAT THE HONOURABLE GENTLEMAN IS RIGHT TO SAY THAT THE SUGGESTION THAT THE TITLE SHOULD INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO HONG KONG IS ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT HAS BEEN CANVASSED, FOR UNDERSTANDABLE REASONS, BUT FOR THE REASONS THAT I HAVE GIVEN IT WOULD NOT, IN OUR JUDGEMENT, WHICH IS ACCEPTABLE AFTER DISCUSSION TO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, FOR THE TITLE TO CARRY THE IMPLICATION WHICH THAT WOULD DO OF A CONTINUING CONSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS COUNTRY AND HONG KONG. I READILY ACCEPT THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN A MATTER OF SWIFT AND EASY DELIBERATIONS TO COME TO A CONCLUSION ABOUT THIS. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE FACTORS WHICH WE HAD IN MIND.

IN THIS SCHEDULE,

CONSERVATIVE BACK BENCHER: (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS) THE USE OF THE WORD MAY BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THIS IS CAUSING CONSIDERABLE CONCERN IN HONG KONG BECAUSE OF THE USE OF 'MAY' RATHER THAN THE WORD 'SHALL'. AND HE HAS JUST DESCRIBED TO US WHAT THIS NEW FORM OF CITIZENSHIP IS GOING TO BE CALLED HE TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT THE CITIZENSHIP AND DOCUMENTATION THAT WILL RESULT FROM SUCH A TITLE.

-

COULD

SIR GEOFFREY: WELL, I HESTITATE TO ANSWER ANY POINT ABOUT THE PRECISE DRAFTING OF A SUB-PARAGRAPH OF A SUB-PARAGRAPH OF A PARAGRAPH OF A SCHEDULE UNPROMPTED, AND I THINK THAT (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS IDENTIFYING THE QUESTIONER AS MR PETER BRUINVELS, CONSERVATIVE)

MR BRUINVELS: YOU HAVE JUST MENTIONED THE CONSTITUTIONAL PURPOSE AND POINTS OF THIS BRITISH NATIONAL (OVERSEAS). WHAT I AM PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN, AND I AM SURE THE HOUSE IS - IS WHAT RIGHTS WILL THEY HAVE, THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG, AFTER THAT DATE IN 1987 (SIC)? WILL THEY BE ABLE TO COME OVER TO THIS COUNTRY TO SETTLE PERMANENTLY?

SIR GEOFFREY: I THINK THAT WE HAVE NOW REACHED THAT POINT IN INTERVENTIONS WHEN I MAY CONCLUDE AT LEAST FOR A TIME THAT THE INTERVENTION IS LIKELY TO BE DEALT WITH IN THE REST OF MY SPEECH. I WILL THEREFORE PROCEED TO THE NEXT SECTION. AS WAS SAYING IF AN AMENDMENT IS TO BE INTRODUCED INCORPORATING THE TITLE INTO THE BILL, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT MIGHT BE ARGUED THAT THAT COULD BE DESIRABLE, THEN THERE SHOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DOING THAT AFTER THE FURTHER EXPLANATION I HAVE DESCRIBED IN ANOTHER PLACE.

I INDICATED ON 5 DECEMBER THAT THE SCHEDULE INCLUDES A SPECIFIC PROVISION THAT THE ORDERS MAY INCLUDE ANY MEASURES THAT ARE NECESSARY, AND THIS IS A SEPARATE POINT, TO ENSURE THAT NO BRITISH NATIONAL, NOR ANY CHILD BORN AFTER THE FIRST OF JULY 1997 TO A BRITISH NATIONAL, IS MADE STATELESS AS A RESULT OF THESE ARRANGEMENTS.

VMR ENOCH POWELL, (OUP): (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS) ... BUT DID HE SAY THAT IF AN AMENDMENT WAS DESIRED TO BE DEBATED THAT COULD HAPPEN IN ANOTHER PLACE. IS HE IMPLYING THAT THERE WILL BE NO OPPORTUNITY ON THE COMMITTEE STAGES OF THIS BILL?

/SIR GEOFFREY: