TNAG-2629-FCO40-3820-Future-of-Hong-Kong-nationality-British-National-(Overseas)-1992 — Page 71

· E.R.

ANNEX

LONG-TERM FUTURE OF WORKING HOLIDAYMAKER SCHEME

The need for changing the current scheme

1. B2 does not consider that abolition of the working holidaymaker scheme without

any successor is a realistic option. Not only would we jeopardize in particular the

ability of British citizens to go to Australia, but youth mobility in itself cannot be said

to cause real immigration worries if it is properly controlled.

2.

Although there is a case to be made for a youth mobility provision of some sort,

the current arrangements, however much they may be improved in the short-term, have

more general defects. There are arguably too many separate youth mobility schemes

both within and outside the Immigration Rules and there is no sound basis for their being

reciprocal. Given the Government's policy of firm control over the taking of work here

by non-EC nationals it is desirable to have a simple, unified system that staff can

understand and operate. B2 believes that the most readily acceptable basis for youth

mobility arrangements should be as far as possible one of reciprocal schemes which are

as much used by our young people as those of the other countries.

3. The idea of reciprocity is in keeping with the policy of our biggest partner in

youth exchange programmes, Australia, and that now being adopted by the USA. The

key to that policy is "worthwhile cultural exchange". However, schemes based on head-

for-head reciprocity have their disadvantages since, for instance, more Britons go to the

USA under BUNAC than Americans come here. In other cases young people may well

want to come here from non-English speaking countries outside the EEA to learn English

while few young Britons would want to go to their countries. To reduce the flow to the

lowest common denominator in the latter case would deprive many British households

of au pairs for instance.