elsewhere.
Again, they are more likely to look to
New Zealand than Britain, but if they did need to be
Their numbers
evacuated to Britain there should not be any particular
problems about admitting them: there would be few of
them (about 50 at most) and given the special-circumstances
of their evacuation their admission, as a special case,
should not create an undesirable precedent.]
4. However, their admission to Britain would be a
matter for decision, by the Home Secretary, at the time
and they would not have rights of entry under the
British Nationality Act.
While this distinction may
Гое
be a rather fine point in respect of the Pitcairners
ers]
It is an important one in respect of inhabitants of
other Dependent Territories, particularly Hong Kong.
The attached note outlines the position for the main
Dependent Territories in this respect. It would therefore
be appropriate to clarify the rights of Pitcairners
and, by implication, other British Dependent Territories
citizens. An inspired PQ would seem the simplest and
most convenient means of doing this. It could be
arranged for when the House meets again in October.
5. Lord Brockway raised the question of citizenship
of Pitcairners in February 1982. Although the reply
referred to the British Nationality Act, it did not
cover it in sufficient detail to meet the need for a
full clarification in the record, And it was, of course, before the 19 July discussion.
C
B
HK.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.