TNAG-1084-FCO40-1334-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1981 — Page 86

949

British Nationality

[22 JUNE 1981 ]

w law to bring some certainty into a most complex area of the law.

My noble friend Lord Home said that our nationality law cried out for certainty. The certainty that this Bill would bring is the knowledge that the status of a British citizen is a certain right to be in this country and to belong here. My noble and learned friend Lord Rawlinson described in his speech, much better than I can, that on grounds of good race relations it really is urgent to remove the uncertainty and put in its place a clear entitlement to British citizenship.

It has been mentioned, but not argued substantially this afternoon, that this Bill was not properly considered in another place. Obviously, this has a bearing upon the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Avebury. I just ought to say that the Bill was most thoroughly considered in another place. It was debated in Com- mittee for almost 140 hours; it was debated on Report for three full days, which was something in excess of 20 hours, and, of course, there was Second Reading on top of that. It is true that a timetable Motion was brought forward by the Government, but that was only after the Committee had spent 90 hours on the Bill, and it cannot be said that, once the timetable Motion had been agreed, it seriously limited debate. Indeed, it proved possible, I notice, for the Committee to rise early on five of the seven days provided by the timetable Motion, without the need to curtail debate. The Bill was, however, exhaustively considered and-I say this most seriously to your Lordships-the amend- ments made to the Bill on Report are proof of the attention which the Government paid in the other place to the views which were put forward in Committee.

The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, has alleged that this Bill is racist. I must say to your Lordships that I find this charge wholly groundless. For every one who is already a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, with a right of abode, there is the clear-cut status of British citizenship. Then, for those who are to acquire British citizenship through birth after the commencement of the Bill there are the two avenues of deriving citizenship from parents, one of whom has to be a British citizen-either the father or the mother-or one of whom is required to be settled here. I am sorry, my Lords, but by no stretch of the imagina- tion can such alternative entitlements be regarded as racially discriminatory. They are not only fair; they are far more generous than the entitlements to citizen- ship offered by all but one of our partners in the European Community.

I remain surprised at the criticism which continues to be levelled at the departure in Clause 1 from the full effect of jus soli-the right of citizenship by birth, if the birth takes place in this country. I would tell the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, that we on the Government side do not have visions of large numbers of pregnant women descending on our arrival lounges at the airports. It was the Green Paper of the noble and learned Lord's party which referred women en route elsewhere". But we think that when people profess to be here temporarily, then it is over-generous to confer citizenship on the children born in that time.

to

66

The noble Lord, Lord Brockway, charged the Bill with creating statelessness. The noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, raised the same issue. The facts

Bill

950

are these: the Bill complies with the United Nations Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness: that is to say, where the United Kingdom is obliged to prevent or remedy statelessness the Bill does so. It is in fact unlikely that the move in the Bill away from the jus soli principle will create stateless persons in any ap- preciable numbers. In almost all cases the children who do not acquire our citizenship at birth will acquire another citizenship; namely, the citizenship of one of their parents. And where this does not happen, Schedule 2 provides for the stateless child who remains in the United Kingdom to acquire British citizenship on registration as an entitlement after five years of residence.

If I may now turn to the question of descent, my noble friend Lord Geddes, speaking with his knowledge of trading with the Far East, expressed considerable concern about the provisions in the Bill regarding descent. I was grateful to my noble friend Lady Trumpington, speaking I think just after my noble friend, for putting squarely to your Lordships some of the points on discent which are to be found in Clauses 2 and 3. If I may add to what my noble friend Lady Trumpington said, there are serious anomalies in the existing law which the Bill would correct. Interestingly, I do not think we have heard very much about them this afternoon.

At present, only men can transmit. They alone can transmit beyond the first generation born overseas in foreign countries. The Government's proposals on descent would apply in all countries and, of course, for women as well as for men. Obviously, therefore, the Bill would operate more generously as far as Common- wealth countries are concerned. There seems to be no serious argument for not having the same arrange- ments in foreign countries, especially given the extre- mely significant provision for descent in the female line and the entitlements which the Bill would provide for registration based on a parent's employment.

But my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter was critical of the provisions in Clause 3 about the rules for citizenship by descent which are specially designed for people working in businesses abroad. With respect to my noble friend, I think the basis of his argument was not entirely correct, because under the provisions set out in Clause 3(2) the registration of children of people working abroad is an entitlement. The Government believe that while, as a general rule, citizenship should be automatically transmissible to the first generation born overseas, British citizens by descent who have real and continuing links with this country should be able to secure citizenship for their children born overseas with a minimum of difficulty. This we think is reflected in Clause 3 which, as amended in another place, will entitle a very wide range of British citizens by descent working abroad to secure citizenship for their children.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, does not my noble friend accept, however, that there is a distinction between Clause 2 in respect of Crown servants abroad, where the entitlement is automatic, and Clause 3 in respect of businessmen abroad where they have to apply and where there is a measure of discretion in the Home Secretary?