CAB129-37 — Page 641

Page 641

the extreme tightness of the Parliamentary programme here and will endeavour to obtain the views of the Government of India as speedily as possible. The United Kingdom High Commissioner at Delhi is being instructed to keep in close touch with him.

6. A revised Bill has been drafted by Parliamentary Counsel on the lines desired and a copy is attached.

Commonwealth Relations Office, Downing Street, S. W. 1,

14th November, 1949.

P. J. N-B.

ANNEX A

NOTE OF AN INFORMAL TALK WITH SIR GIRJA BAJPAI AT THE COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS OFFICE ON 9TH NOVEMBER

The following were present :-

Sir Girja Bajpai.

Sir Percivale Liesching, Commonwealth Relations Office.

Sir Norman Brook, Cabinet Office.

Sir Alan Ellis, First Parliamentary Counsel.

Mr. W. S. Murrie, Home Office.

Mr. F. F. Turnbull, Commonwealth Relations Office.

Mr. B. Cockram, Commonwealth Relations Office.

Sir Girja Bajpai explained that he had received a telegram from India informing him that the Cabinet would wish to consider the questions which were raised by the memorandum which had been given to him and of which a copy had been passed to the Department of External Affairs. He was not therefore in a position to say definitely what the views of the Government of India would be.

Sir Percivale Liesching replied that he ought also to tell Sir Girja that there had been a slight change of position in the United Kingdom. Ministers were inclined to think that the common-sense course would be for them to await the passage of the Indian citizenship law, which it was now understood would be introduced into Parliament in India shortly after the new Constitution came into force, before attempting to decide exactly what legislation would be required to fit the existing United Kingdom nationality law to the new circumstances. For this reason they were inclined to confine themselves to the introduction of a Bill which would continue the existing situation so far as India and Indians were concerned and provide for such consequential amendment of existing legislation as might be immediately necessary by Orders in Council.

Sir Norman Brook emphasised that this change of position related only to legislation dealing with nationality. Ministers recognised that it was essential to introduce legislation to continue to India and to Indians the privileges which they at present enjoyed and which it was agreed at the April conference were, so far as possible, to be continued after India became a Republic. They had, however, had to amend the United Kingdom nationality legislation both in 1948 and this year and they would prefer not to embark on further legislation in this field until they had more precise information about the proposed Indian citizenship law. A further consideration was the extremely tight Parliamentary programme; there were only a very few weeks left during which legislation could be passed by Parliament before 26th January.

Sir Girja Bajpai said that the Government of India for their part would have far too much to do in the next few weeks--in connection with the completion of the constitution to be able to give the consideration that woody be necessary to drafting a Citizenship Bill. What was important therefore was that such

325A

3