[Mr. Ti Eggar]
refugees. In other words, we try to multiply up, with help from other countries, the number that we are prepared to accept.
Mr. Wrigglesworth rose-
Mr. Eggar: If the hon. Gentleman will allow me to continue for a moment, I shall of course give way.
As well as the main resettlement countries, we have approaached other countries that have taken Indo-Chinese refugees in the past. Ministers have raised the whole question of further resettlement with their opposite numbers in other countries, and we have made regular representations through our diplomatic missions.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees accords priority to the resettlement of refugees from Hong Kong, and has approached many Governments who seek his advice when allocating their refugee resettlement quotas. They have been very supportive in our efforts to help in the resettlement process.
So far, we have had a number of encouraging responses as a result of the initiative that we launched last September. Australia has agreed to accept for settlement a further 200 refugees, Canada 50, Finland 70, the Netherlands 80, New Zealand 10 and Sweden 100. The United States, which resettles more Indo-Chinese refugees than any other country, is currently accepting refugees at an annual rate of some 1,800 - 200 more than the previous year's ceiling. We are extremely grateful to all those countries for their efforts to help Hong Kong, and it is fair to claim that much of the credit for that additional resettlement is due to this Government's initiative that was taken in September. We have indications that a number of other countries are likely to respond favourably, and we are of course continuing the pressure.
Mr. Wrigglesworth: I am pleased to hear what the Minister has just reported, but does not he understand that waiting for the response of other Governments, before giving a commitment beyond the end of 1986, makes it much more difficult for other Governments to respond in the way that we would like? It is almost a circular problem. They are waiting to see what the British Government will do, and the British Government are waiting to see what they will do. Will not the Minster break the circle by making it clear that we will maintain that commitment after to the end of this year?
Mr. Eggar: We did exactly that in September. It was our initiative to take the extra resettlement cases, and our diplomatic initiative following that decision in the White Paper, that enabled us to persuade other countries to take more refugees than they would otherwise have done. I have already said that we are discussing the possibility of other countries taking further refugees. I do not think that at present it is quite appropriate for us to make any announcement about our future intentions. This is not only widely accepted by other countries but it is also understood by the UNHCR.
The presence of refugees in Hong Kong camps is one of the many sad aspects of the Indo-Chinese refugee problem. As the hon. Gentleman made clear, in an ideal world refugee camps, whether closed or open, would simply not exist. But neither I nor any other Minister could say that it was satisfactory or desirable to have 4,600
190
1200
vietnamese Refugees (Hong Kong)
356
refugees in closed camps and slightly more than 4,000 in open camps. Refugee situations are never ideal, but having said that we must be realistic and accept, as did the hon. Gentleman, that the Hong Kong Government have done a great deal to make the life of the refugee as bearable as possible.
I know that many hon. Members find the whole idea of closed camps, of depriving innocent people of their liberty, repugnant. This Government dislike the policy. If, however, we were to end the policy now, the result would be that many more refugees would set out from Vietnam for Hong Kong, many in unseaworthy craft, with inevitable and tragic loss of life. Those who reached Hong Kong because there would be some-would place an enormous burden on the resources of that already overcrowded territory. The result of ending our closed camp policy would be more human suffering in this tragic and troubled area of the world. The House will probably agree that in the circumstances the present policy is the only reasonable one to pursue.
Doubts have been expressed in some quarters about whether the closed camp policy has worked. Anyone who looks objectively at the statistics will see that as soon as the closed camp policy was introduced there was a considerable fall in numbers of arrivals in Hong Kong as compared with arrivals in other parts of the region.
Conditions in the camps have been the subject of much comment in press and Parliament. The Hong Kong Government and Her Majesty's Government attach great importance to ensuring that refugees are adequately cared for in the camps. I should like at this stage to quote remarks made by Mr. Paul Hartling, the last United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, when he visited Bowring closed camp, the camp that the hon. Gentleman also visited. He said that he did not like the idea of closed camps but that inside the Bowring camp he found "the circumstances, the conditions, very encouraging”. He compared the situation of the children at the Bowring camp with that of some of the refugees in camps in other parts of south east Asia who, he said, were starving, sick, destitute and had tears in their eyes. His conclusion was that the Hong Kong authorities and the voluntary agencies were doing a very good job, for which he was very grateful. That was not Minister speaking, but the last United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
I submit to the House that conditions in the closed camps are at least as good as those in other refugee camps in the region.
The hon. Gentleman quite rightly commented favourably on the work done by voluntary agencies in the refugee camps in Hong Kong. This work is of the greatest importance. I would like to associate myself totally with the hon. Gentleman's remarks and with the praise that he gave to the individuals from a number of different countries who are working for the voluntary agencies. I hope that they will not be discouraged by some recent and, in our view, unjust criticisms of their work.
I cannot, in conclusion, let pass the opportunity to express the Government's admiration for the quite remarkable efforts made by the people and authorities of Hong Kong in caring for so many refugees. They have given temporary asylum to over 100,000 Vietnamese since 1975. In 1979 alone, over 68,000 boat people arrived in Hong Kong. No refugee has ever been turned away. In the words of Mr. Paul Hartling, at a press conference in Hong Kong a year ago,
1
}
(
1
1
I
ย