TNAG-1086-FCO40-1336-Implications-for-Hong-Kong-of-changes-in-the-British-nationa-1981 — Page 146

275

see that

United K

British Nationality

[ 13 OCTOBER 1981 ]

British Commonwealth consists of the om and the other territories overseas, plus the sovereign states. There are two distinct sets of category, and not three.

Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, with your Lordships' permission, perhaps I may intervene in order to deal with two of the points made by my noble friend Lord Drumalbyn. First, my noble friend castigated me for saying that the concept of “British national “ is not something known to our domestic law. I stand by that. It is most certainly not. This Bill is a British nationality Bill. The word "nationality" does not appear in the amendment and, indeed, it was not the word that I used when I said that the concept of

British national was not known to our domestic law.

<<

*

My noble friend also asked about consular assistance I think that that was the point he had in mind—to CBDTS travelling abroad. As I made clear carlier, we maintain our consular responsibilities for CBDTs and others covered by the Bill and will, of course, continue to exercise them. Again, this piece of legislation is not the appropriate place to provide for a more formalised undertaking, but I am quite confident that we can ensure that foreign governments fully understand that our responsibilities remain and are not diminished by the Bill.

I should also like to deal with the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan. He reminded the House, as my noble friend Lord Geddes has reminded the House on several occasions, that the people of Hong Kong at least understand that an immigra- tion undertaking cannot be made in respect of them. However, as I also said in my opening remarks, it is not only the people of Hong Kong who are covered by the amendment tabled by my noble friend. For example, there are a million or more United Kingdom passport holders who will become British overseas citizens in the country of Malaysia, who would indeed be covered by my noble friend's amendment, and I am not certain that they have the sanguine view about the immigration possibilities to which my noble friend referred with regard to the people of Hong Kong.

Lord Segal: My Lords, the right reverend Prelate referred in cloquent terms to the welcome accorded by the citizens of Hong Kong to returning British troops in 1945. I should like to remind the House of a welcome accorded by the people Hong Kong more recently than 1945. I refer to the welcome which Hong Kong gave to tens of thousands of Vietnamese refugees who sought a haven there. On the ground of sheer humanity alone, I think that we should recognise the generous attitude of the people of Hong Kong throughout its past history. For over 40 years they have provided a refuge to refugees from Chinese Communism on the mainland who, at great risk to their lives, have been fortunate enough to enter the free atmosphere of Hong Kong. It would be churlish on our part not to pay tribute to the welcome of the people of Hong Kong to the refugees who have sought a haven of refuge there in the past. I think that we should hesitate-and hesitate a long time before we do anything to change the existing status of the people of Hong Kong under the British Crown. We should pay our own tribute to the

Bill

276

generosity shown by Hong Kong towards the refugees who have sought a haven of refuge there in the past.

75

Viscount Simon: My Lords, I should like to ask the noble Lord, Lord Trefgarne, one brief question. He reaffirmed that there was no definition of a British national". He appeared to imply that “ Britisk nation- ality was something that was understood. I do not understand how there can be anything called “British nationality unless there are people who enjoy it. However, let us suppose that the noble Lord, Lord Geddes, were to come back on Third Reading with the same amendment, except that instead of saying in the last line:

"shall have the status of a British National ",

it said:

"shall enjoy British nationality",

would that meet the difficulty of the noble Lord, Lord Trefgaine?

Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, if I have the leave of your Lordships to speak yet again, the fundamental difficulty with this amendment is that it will create uncertainty and doubt in the minds of those to whom the terms of the amendment would apply and--I have to say this in plain terms-would, I believe, imply some sort of eventual immigration commitment in the minds of some less informed people. That is the principal difficulty which we face.

Lord Geddes: My Lords, I am immensely grateful and heartened by the tremendous support for this amendment from all sides of the House this afternoon. I think that it should be clearly understood-I certainly understand it in my own mind-that it is an apolitical amendment and in no way reflects the views of one side of the House or the other.

The other point which I should like to make most strongly is that, although your Lordships may have become increasingly wary of my advancement of the interest of Hong Kong—and I certainly adhere to that-- this amendment is not phrased solely for Hong Kong; it is phrased on a much wider front. This should be very clearly borne in mind, albeit that Hong Kong is a very important part of that front.

I shall not attempt to rebut-because we have had a long, and I think very interesting, debate on the subject the comments made by my noble friend on the Front Bench. I must confess that I am distinctly more than disappointed with them. To use language that is perhaps 1ather stronger than that to which your Lordships are accustomed I found them trite in the extreme. Almost without exception every argument that he used could be turned on its head. He has expressed again and again--most recently just now--- the view that the amendment would create confusion, would generate confusion and would blur the citizen- ship category. I contend most strongly that it will do absolutely the opposite. It will clarify precisely the categories of citizenship which are already in the Bill, and make it manifestly clear to all those concerned, both to individuals and to the rest of the world, what is the nationality of those citizens. I intend to piess this amendment.