TNAG-0903-FCO40-1113-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-British-nationality-1979 — Page 118

E.R.

9.

CONFIDENTIAL

in any case inescapable.

The comparison with EC nationals will

certainly still be recalled if any change is proposed, however, and for the most part it has to be said that jobs taken by working holiday makers tend to be of a casual nature.

(b) Discrimination

+

The Rule clearly discriminates between Commonwealth citizens and foreign nationals.

In practice, it can also be said to discriminate between the New and Old Commonwealth. Applications from the New Commonwealth do not in fact tend to be made;

if they were, it seems

likely that considerable numbers might benefit (though some right not satisfy us that their intention to leave was genuine) unless we took the line that their coming for such extended holidays was not traditiona and was therefore not to be permitted, and that of course would make the discrimination all the more apparent.

(c) Scope of the provisions

Provided the other conditions are met, a working holiday maker need not be "young". Also, an adjudicator has gallantly determined that a 40 year-old woman qualifies as being young. Cur posts overseas restrict the grant of entry clearances to applicants under 30. Arguably, the age-limits should be similarly restricted at all other points in the control.

The appellate authorities have determined that time spent here as a working holiday maker is not aggregable, so that there is no bar against a succession of 5-year holidays. Nor is there any bar against someone staying for 5 years as a working holiday maker after a previous lengthy stay in some other capacity (e.g. as a student or a visitor). There is a case for reducing the maximum length of stay to something like what it was before 1973, and proventing people from bencfiting more than once, or after a lengthy stay in some other capacity.

The main case for abolition in terms of immigration is the difficulty which

could result from epplications being made from the New Commonwealth, together with

the unemployment aspect. It seems doubtful whether the case is strong enough to

justify the international and domestic controversy which would be caused by a proposal to abolish the provision. The case for some amendment in the provisions is stronger, however, and proposals are made below.

Proposals for amendment

10. (i) Applicants should be required to be within the age range of 17 to 25.

If the length of a working holiday was reduced to 2 years (see below), such a limit would enable people to be here up to the age of 27. This would be in line with the Australian limits for working holidays which are 18 years to a 'relaxed' 25 years.

4 -

CONFIDENTIAL