CONFIDENTIAL
4. It was the coincidence of our own stock-taking with the Australian approach that more than anything else led us to propose the Honolulu Group as the vehicle. Initial indications were that the Group was more alive and welcoming than it turned out to be. However, since then things have changed. As you suggest in your letter, M. Hocké is keen to wrest the Danish proposals on the global refugee problem from the Third Committee. It may, therefore, be easier to persuade the High Commissioner to convene a (series of) meeting(s) on general refugee issues, at which we could push our Hong Kong (and wider SE Asian) concerns than to pursue the issue through a reluctant and moribund Honolulu Group. We have decided not to return to the charge with the Honolulu Group for the moment
to explore the possibility of UNHCR-sponsored meetings. We shall be doing this over the next few weeks and shall keep you informed of developments.
5.
Finally, thank you for the information on Canada's resettlement quotas for next year. It is most useful. Efforts continue to persuade the Home Office to maintain a regular off-take (of any number) of family reunion cases from Hong Kong.
In this regard you may be interested in the recent exchange of letters (attached) between the Secretary of State and the Home Secretary. We are considering how to respond and will of course let you know if we succeed in extracting any new resettlement commitment from Home Office Ministers.
ever
yous
Peter.
P K Williams
United Nations Department
CC:
UKMis Geneva
Chanceries: Canberra
Washington *Tokyo
Mr Hum,
HKD
Mr Adams, SEAD
*Mr Harrison, MVD
*Mr Woodhouse, Government Secretariat, Hong Kong
*With copies of enclosures
CONFIDENTIAL