§ (1) Where it appears to the Secretary of State that a certificate of naturalisation granted by him has been obtained by false representations or fraud, the Secretary of State may by order revoke the certificate, and the order of revocation shall have effect from such date as the Secretary of State may direct.
§ (2) Where the Secretary of State revokes a certificate of naturalisation, he may order the certificate to be given up and cancelled; and any person refusing or neglecting to give up the certificate shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds.
§ Mr. ROTHSCHILD
I beg to move in Sub-section (1) to leave out the words "to the Secretary of State," and to insert instead thereof the words "after proceedings taken for the purpose in accordance with rules of court made under Section 29 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879."
It seems to me it would be much better if everything were not left entirely to the Secretary of State, and the object of my Amendment is to take away from him this power to annul a certificate of naturalisation. It seems to me that if a case is made out in the Law Courts that a certificate of naturalisation has been acquired by 1486 fraud, certainly that certificate should be withdrawn, but I do not think it should be left to the Secretary of State.
§ Mr. McKENNA
I can assure the hon. Member that it was no part of the action of the Secretary of State to obtain these powers for himself. They have been conferred upon him by Parliament, which has enacted that he shall have a discretion in granting a certificate. This Clause provides that where it appears to the Secretary of State that a certificate of naturalisation has been obtained by false representations or fraud, the Secretary of State may by order revoke the certificate. I suggest that if the Secretary of State has the major power, that is to say, the discretion in granting the certificate, if he has been led to grant the certificate by false representations or fraud, he should be empowered to revoke it. I cannot see a shred of argument in support of the Amendment.