§ 81. Mr. T. Reidasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to give an assurance that Her Majesty's Government will not directly or indirectly make 221W any advances to any persons concerned with a view to inducing the Sudanese people to enter the British Commonwealth.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydIt is the view of Her Majesty's Government that the Sudanese people should be free to express their wishes about their future status in accordance with the terms of the Anglo-Egyptian Agreement.
§ 83. Sir H. Williamsasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why, in Article 4 of the draft agreement relating to the Sudan, there is a reference to one "citizen of the United Kingdom" and not to a British subject."
§ Mr. NuttingUnder Section I of the British Nationality Act of 1948 the term "British subject" includes citizens of the other Commonwealth countries as well as citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies. The intention of Article 4 of the Agreement was one of the members of the Governor-General's Commission should be a British subject who had derived his British nationality from a close connection with the United Kingdom rather than with any other Commonwealth country or any of the Colonies. The expression "citizen of the United Kingdom" was purposely used in order to convey this meaning.
§ 84. Sir H. Williamsasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the draft Agreement, in relation to the Sudan, in its preamble purports to be made by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and in Article 2 of Annex IV, is described as an agreement with Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and why, in the preamble, the United Kingdom precedes the Egyptian Government, and in Annex IV the Egyptian Government precedes the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. NuttingAnnex IV of the Agreement contains a list of amendments to be made to a separate instrument, namely the draft Self-Government Statute for the Sudan, which is not an intergovernmental agreement but an Order made by the Governor-General in the exercise of his powers under Article 66 of the 1948 Sudan Ordinance. There is therefore no reason why the nomenclature and precedence employed in the Statute should be exactly the same as222W that employed in the Annex, or why the language of the Statute should be in conformity with normal treaty practice.