XN000022-1985-01-22 — Page 24

6

SIR GEOFFREY: I AM SURE THE OPPORTUNITY EXISTS ON COMMITTEE STAGE IN THIS HOUSE AS IN THE OTHER PLACE FOR THAT POINT TO BE DEBATED. I WAS INDICATING, HOWEVER, THAT, IN MY JUDGEMENT, IF THE MATTER IS TO BE FURTHER EXPLAINED AND APPRECIATED IN HONG KONG BEFORE IT IS INCORPORATED IN THE BILL, IF IT IS TO BE INCORPORATED

THE BILL, THEN IT MIGHT BE MORE SUITABLE FOR RATHER MORE TIME TO ELAPSE WHICH IS WHY IDENTIFIED THE OTHER PLACE. BUT I AM SURE THAT NOTHING THAT I CAN SAY WOULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF INHIBITING THE RIGHT HONOURABLE GENTLEMAN IF HE WISHED TO DEBATE IT IN THIS HOUSE. I AM INDICATING, HOWEVER, THE LIKELY RESPONSE TO IT (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS) ... BUT ALL THE NECESSARY AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONALITY LEGISLATION COULD, IT IS POSSIBLE, BE ARRANGED BY ONE ORDER IN COUNCIL ALTHOUGH, AS HONOURABLE MEMBERS WILL SEE, THE BILL WOULD ALLOW ADJUSTMENT OR ADDITION BY FURTHER ORDERS IN COUNCIL IF THAT BECAME NECESSARY.

I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASISE THAT THESE POWERS TO ALTER THE NATIONALITY LAWS BY WAY OF AN ORDER IN COUNCIL COULD ONLY BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURPOSES I HAVE DESCRIBED. THEY WOULDN'T PERMIT ALTERATIONS TO BE MADE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE OR IN RESPECT OF ANY OTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE NOT CONNECTED WITH

HONG KONG.

WE WOULD INTEND TO MAKE THE ORDER AT AN EARLY DATE AND AT THE LATEST WITHIN A YEAR OF THE PASSAGE OF THIS BILL. THE BILL PROVIDES, AGAIN AS THE HOUSE WILL HAVE SEEN, THAT SUCH ORDERS WILL BE SUBJECT TO AFFIRMATIVE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES. AND I WOULD EMPHASISE ON THAT POINT THAT MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES WILL

HAVE A FULL OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER AND DEBATE THE PROPOSALS IN THAT ORDER IN COUNCIL.

I DON'T AGREE, IF I MAY ANTICIPATE THE POINT THAT IS LIKELY TO BE MADE FROM THE BENCHES OPPOSITE, WITH THE RIGHT HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR SOUTH DOWN'S VIEW, THAT THIS WILL GIVE INADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE MEASURES PROPOSED. IT WAS PRECISELY BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT THE HOUSE WOULD WANT TO GIVE DETAILED CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDERS THAT WE PROPOSE TO MAKE THEM SUBJECT TO AFFIRMATIVE PROCEDURE. AND THE GOVERNMENT, OBVIOUSLY, WOULD CLEARLY TAKE CAREFUL ACCOUNT OF POINTS WHICH ENJOYED WIDESPREAD SUPPORT AMONG MEMBERS WHICH MAY INDEED ARISE IN THE COURSE OF TODAY'S DEBATE.

+

MR DENIS HEALEY (LAB) (ANNOUNCER SPEAKS)

THIS, I THINK, MAY PROVE TO BE THE NUB OF ANY DISAGREEMENT ON THE MAJOR PROCEDURE WHICH THE GOVERNMENT RECOMMENDS. WILL IT BE POSSIBLE FOR THE GOVERNMENT, HAVING MADE AN ORDER FOR DISCUSSION IN BOTH HOUSES, TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF STRONG OBJECTIONS TO SOME ELEMENT IN THE ORDER AND, WITHOUT SEEKING AFFIRMATION OF THE ORDER BY THE HOUSES, TO REVISE THE ORDER AND BRING IT BACK FOR LATER VOTING? BECAUSE THIS. I THINK, IS WHAT MOST CONCERNS US THAT IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE UNDER THE PROCEDURE ENVISAGED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO PUT FORWARD AN ORDER TO WHICH THERE TURNED OUT TO BE VERY STRONG AND VALID OBJECTIONS IN HONG KONG AND IN THIS HOUSE AND IN ANOTHER PLACE AND YET THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT SEEK EVEN IF IT WISHES TO VARY THE TERMS OF THE ORDER BEFORE A VOTE WAS TAKEN.

/SIR GEOFFREY: