1647A
Our reference: Your reference:
HKK 2431
RJT McLaren Esq
John Goddard
HOME OFFICE
Queen Anne's Gate, LONDON, SWIH 9AT
i Metia
Direct line: 01-213 7292
Switchboard: 01-213 3000
720A
1) M. Within a 1. Aw1/5
2) P.A.
I have now obtained a copy of the "Governor's letter of 31 August (Flash): it does not affect the immediate issue. I have incorpor- Hong Kong and General Department at the points made by No Head and by N Simpson-
ated Orlebar in the attached draft telegram to 26 September 1979 Hong Kong
Foreign and Commonwealth Office King Charles Street
LONDON SW1A 2AH
Dear Milan
VIETNAMESE REFUGEES:
(Flay B) (Discussed intl & Goddard in
• The Home Office- in NHead's absence-
who confirmed Home Office agreement
INTAKE FROM HONG KONG
W. Chantill
28/9
to the revised telegram, how
sent for dispatch)
When we spoke the other day I told you that on present plans we were aiming to take in the remainder of the ",500" quota from Hong Kong at the end of this month and to make a brisk start on the "10,000" quota during October-December. This will be at the very least at the rate of 500 a month, but as you know, we shall be reviewing progress in the light of the Governor's letter of
31 August to Philip Woodfield (copied to Cortazzi). Philip Woodfield expects to be in the position to convey a decision to the Governor on this during his visit to Hong Kong later next month.
(67230
In the meantime, we are concerned that everything should be done at the Hong Kong and to maintain the flow of refugees out of the colony. The Government of Hong Kong, of course, need no exhortation on this but, as I told you, our worry is that those responsible for handling the transport arrangements in Hong Kong (ICEM) should not fall down on the job. It would obviously be frustrating both to Hong Kong and ourselves and to the voluntary refugee organisations in this country if our proposed rate of intake were to be frustrated by purely logistical difficulties. This point was emphasised when Colin Birt of our Immigration and Nationality Department and Mrs Morley-Fletcher of BCAR were in Hong Kong for the selection process during August. It may do no harm, however, to make the point again to Hong Kong - particularly given that we have recently called forward the first large batch of refugees (some 600) in the hope that arrangements can be made for them to arrive at the end of this month or very shortly thereafter. What I think we need to ensure is that ICEM are fully aware of the likely scale of their responsibilities and make sufficiently firm forward plans for the programme not to be held up. This may have implications, of course, for the staffing of the ICEM Office in Hong Kong and I shall be discussing separately with Michael Simpson-Orlebar (to whom I am sending a copy of this letter) whether there would be any advantage in making an approach to ICEM headquarters through our Mission in Geneva. For the time being, however, you may feel that no harm would be done in reminding Hong Kong that all our respective efforts could be frustrated by a bottle-neck in the transport arrangements. I attach a short draft for this purpose which, if you agree, could be embodied in a telegram.
your sincenly maulan
Enc.
M E HEAD