CODE 18-77
MICK 24311
Rot pl.
(175)
Mr Segar SEAD
SHIP RESCUES: MV HUPEH, MV POYANG
1.
Thank you for copying to me your minute of 4 August and the accompanying draft letter.
(66)
2. As you point out in paragraph 8 of the draft letter, we have taken the line over British ships registered in Bermuda or Hong Kong (and I would not put the word British in inverted commas, since Hong Kong and Bermuda registered vessels are British under our own legislation) that it is HMG who must issue the guarantee, but that the guarantee is issued on behalf of Bermuda or Hong Kong, who are responsible for settling or finding places for any residual refugees. The same would be true in the case of any other dependent territory.
Q
3. In the case of Bermuda we took a fairly tough line, insisting that Bermuda must face up to its responsibilities and refusing to bail the territory out by accepting the residue for settlement in the UK, though as you say things have moved on somewhat since the showdown with Bermuda took place. One of the reasons for the tough line was one of shipping policy since if dependent territories are to have ports of registry and are to attempt to attract ocean-going vessels on to their registries they must accept the responsibilities of running a register in relation to safety and manning standards etc. as well as towards refugees rescued at
sea.
4. The position of Hong Kong and Hong Kong registered ships in this respect is in principle similar to the position of Bermuda and Bermuda reistered ships and to that extent the two territories ought to be treated in the same way. The special factor in Hong Kong's case is that it is also a very frequent first port of call at which refugees are disembarked and is therefore already bearing more than its share of the load.
5.
The guarantee system as a whole has no legal basis and certainly the way that we arrange affairs within the UK and dependent territories once a guarantee has been issued by HMG is an internal matter. I understand that you have been advised that constitutionally HMG could compel the Bermuda Government to take in refugees whose resettlement has been guaranteed by HMG on Bermuda's behalf, and the same may well be true of Hong Kong. It is essentially a matter of policy whether we attempt to persuade or ultimately to compel a territory to take in refugees picked up by its vessel. In the case of Hong Kong there may be good policy reasons for not doing so. We must, however, recognise that we might have to justify the different treatment of Hong Kong and Bermuda. We could do this on the ground that Hong Kong is a frequent first port of call whereas Bermuda is not (even though there may be different special factors in Bermuda's case, such as its size and the nature of its population).
/6.
RESTRICTED