(101) in CR 48/4821/79 II
3
9th November 1982
While raising issues similar to those affecting the "Poyang", the
fact remains that the FCO has already been addressed on the "Hupeh"
case separately by both the British Embassy in Manila and ourselves.
L The "Hupey" case is not currently a further burden on Hong Kong's
accommodation and resettlement problems, and as such I do not intend
to pursue it now.)
7.
I take this opportunity to refer also to the case of the
"City of Edinburgh". This British-registered vessel arrived here
on 26 June 1982, with 34 Vietnamese refugees aboard. In our R-telegram number 678 of 25 June we sought confirmation that the UK
would accept for resettlement any refugees for whom the UNHCR could
not find alternative resettlement places within the standard 90-day
period. FCO telegram number 481 of 25 June gave the assurance we had requested.
8.
1
NIR
The 90-day period has now passed. I understand from our
Immigration Department and the local UNHCR Office that the latter
awaits only a "call forward" from its UK Office, when so authorised
by the Home Office. Again, the fact that these 27 are now "overdue"
for departure causes us some problems with the resolution of other
"overdue" cases.
9.
The Poyang" and the
comprise more thanhalf of the
"City of Edinburgh" cases together
"ship rescue" refugees now detained.
Could you please advise me as to when you will be able to accept
these 27 "City of Edinburgh" cases in the UK?
tom
Patrich.
(P J Williamson)
CC:
RJ F Hoare, HKGD/FCO