2
third countries where UK registered vessels are involved
then wought to be prepared to do so on behalf of vessels
Overseas territories.
registered in our Gelenial ports. That being said, however,
guarantees
!
30
we should not wish to provide undertakings to any countries
without first exploring the possibility of having the
basis of the
usually
refugees landed on the undertaking provided by UNHCR.
If the UNHCR undertaking is unacceptable to a third country we
should, as we have done in the past, wish to consider any
{
1.
I
bilateral action which may be appropriate such as represent-
ations: These have been successful on a number of occasions..
In other words, our guarantee should be given as a last
resort. Where we provide an undertaking on behalf of one of
our overseas territories, we would try to ensure that the territory itself should accept the refugees if this is3k
possible, in this way extending the time available to UNHCR for
finding places of permanent settlement for the refugees and
thereby reducing still further the chances of any refugees
picked up by ships registered in Colonial ports, eventually
coming to the UK. These points may be worth including inte
your draft submission.
4.
1
·
ta
There is also the question of British-owned vessels of
foreign registration. Sometimes these vessels have a much closer connexion with the UK than with the country or ai 1990 registration. Wo-baveialready had experience of SUCHER ·ÅGOT
expantenos e
vessel, the "Golden Delphin" ( Liberian registered and British owned), where the Liberians failed to respond. Under the‚ Î
DOV
arrangements proposed in your draft, we would have no
authority to provide guarantees in cases like these.' Conversely, there may be ships which are 1UK registered but
foreign owned and which have no connexion with the UK, apart '
from their registration, on whose behalf 'we would be??
・小
nad 19h viloi gulgeb
vic
Pe. ISWI
འ
viu ani.
OA
/expected