FRUM HONG KONG BILL UNT
93
06.06.1990 11:24
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill
HOUSE OF COMMONS
[Mr. Darling] That category of people certainly have a need, as I cal hderstand the uncertainty and worry of British citizens who fear that if anything happened to them. their spouses would be left high and dry. That must worry every couple. It is bad enough making plans for retirement. considering the uncertainties of what might happen when a spouse dies, but to know that a spouse may be left without effective nationality is extremely unsatisfactory.
The Government's argument is all about keeping people in Hong Kong, but I should not want to take the risk. I should want to come to this country to try to clock up my three year's residence, so that my wife could acquire British citizenship before the grim reaper took me away. If I did not do so, I should be very worried about what might happen to her in the future. We are discussing a small group of people—I under- stand that there are fewer than 1,000.
I know that the Government made a welcome con- cession for war widows. I believe that such people in Hong Kong are in the same position. I freely admit that the Government's strategy is based on what they call key people-those who are economically essential to Hong Kong. When considering the problems of Hong Kong, which are not easy to tackle, we should be mainly concerned with the people who will have a need in 1997. I shall not labour the point. The Minister understands it and will either accept or reject it.
Amendment No. 40 may be a probing amendment as I am unsure of the position. Let us suppose that the Secretary of State has registered somcone as being a key person under the scheme and his spouse is regis- tered under schedule 2 of the Bill. If the key person dies, will the spouse and the children remain registered under the scheme, or will their registration fall because the spouse who had given rise to the matter was no longer alive?
The amendment may not be perfectly drafted, but the idea is that when a registration has taken place, it cannot be undone. I can foresee all sorts of difficulties and with things being what they are, I have no doubt that some of the 50,000 will unfortunately die before they can exercise their rights under the Bill. It would be very unfortuante if there was uncertainty about what would happen to the deceased's wife and family.
Amendment No. 40 may be unnecessary, but I thought that the matter should be explored. However, amendment No. 36 is necessary as the category of people referred to may be hard done by. There is much feeling about the matter, not just on the Opposition Benches. If the Minister will agree to reconsider the matter, I shall happily do the decent thing at the end of the debate. However, if he says no, I warn him that this is a matter about which some of us feel very strongly.
Mr. Maclennan: On Second Reading, my right hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) drew attention to this problem and said that we wanted it to be amended in Committee. It will affect our attitude to the Bill significantly on Third Reading if the Govern- ment do not make a move. The category of people covered by amendment No. 36 could be left high and dry. I need add nothing to the argument for the hon.
Standing Committee A
NO. 4
P. 3
94
Member for Edinburgh, Central (Mr. Darling) as he put his case well. We have received many represen- tations from the people involved and those who are worried about their well being. The Government's bona fides in caring for such British citizens and their widows is now at test, and the Minister must offer a strong commitment.
Mr. Wells: There are problems that are consequent upon the amendment being accepted by the Govern- ment. We should be concerned about widows in Hong Kong whose husbands were British citizens. There is another category and I should be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minsister will consider the matter.
I receive considerable correspondence from Hong Kong and I have a paper from the Concerned British Expatriates' Society. It says that members of that organisation are married to women who are not British citizens. The women would have to reside in Britain for four years continuously, unless given permission to leave, before they could be considered for naturalisa- tion. Some of the husbands are in very valuable jobs. both in the civil service and the private sector, so it would be unsatisfactory for their wives to live continu- ously in Britain to qualify for British citizenship. If the husbands should die, the wives would be left in the position described by the hon. Members for Edin- burgh, Central and for Caithness and Sutherland (Mr. Maclennan).
Will my hon. Friend the Minister consider the diffi- culties that that small number of British citizens who are married to non-British citizens will face? We need to find a way to provide them with the citizenship of their husbands without their having to leave Hong Kong before 1997.
Mr. Peter Lloyd: I know that there has been great concern about the position of spouses of British citi- zens in the territory. We have all had much correspon- dence on this subject. I certainly have, my hon. Friend has referred to it, and so have the hon. Members for Edinburgh, Central and for Caithness and Sutherland. I recognise that it has been real worry. There is no practical difficulty about the position of the partners of British citizens when the citizens are still alive. Such non-British spouses can accompany their husbands or wives to the United Kingdom for settlement at any time. Of course, they do not get British citizenship immediately; that is governed by the normal rules under the 1981 Act. As I said in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford in the previous debate, we want to keep as closely to that Act as we can and have acted differently under the Bill only when there was a special and compelling reason to so
So.
The hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central, spoke about non-British spouses wishing to accompany Brit- ish citizens to the United Kingdom for settlement. They will have to obtain entry clearance and to satisfy the requirements of the immigration rules, which
6 JUN 30 11:18
01 273 4189 PAGF.AR
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.