2050
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ·
5 July 1989
other countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia in establishing guarantees that the people of Hong Kong will be accommodated on a broad basis in these countries as refugees if it proves to be necessary in the years ahead. The second system of assurance is to exempt certain categories of Hong Kong people from British immigration controls. These people include "key people in the Hong Kong civil service, the police or in any area of public life". They have the chance to settle in the United Kingdom.
Sir, the problem is pretty obvious now. On the question of the right of abode in the United Kingdom for British subjects in Hong Kong, since the British Government has accepted that she will take in certain categories of Hong Kong residents, it is only indicative that she has the obligation to offer this right to all the citizens in Hong Kong. And it will be unfair, unrighteous, dishonourable and undesirable for the British Government to arbitrarily accord discriminatory treatment among the people of Hong Kong.
If Britain can go so far as to deprive Hong Kong people of their constitutional entitlement to the right of abode in the United Kingdom, how can she bring herself to solicit international assistance for us? Although we hope that in times of difficulties we will be able to obtain support from friendly countries, we would not like to see this being used by the British Government as an excuse to evade the rightful claims of the Hong Kong people to the right of abode in Britain.
According to the report, should Hong Kong become an intolerable place to live in, the countries concerned will offer asylum to millions of "Hong Kong refugees" on the basis of the established guarantees. What it refers to is apparently the situation after 1997. However, judging from the situation of the Vietnamese refugees or boat people arriving in Hong Kong, where have all these "international guarantees" gone?
Having said this, it should be admitted that the United Kingdom has never before adopted such positive attitude in expressing their concern towards the future well-being of the Hong Kong people. The Foreign Secretary, Sir Geoffrey HOWE, stated that "the Sino-British Joint Declaration is the foundation for the future stability and prosperity of Hong Kong." But under the present circumstances, what sort of assurance has been provided to this "future"? Most probably, the Foreign Secretary himself would not even venture to "accept this insurance liability". Actually, the problem in question only reveals the fact that it is essential within the responsibilities of the British Government to understand and give further consideration to the background and the state of mind of the Hong Kong people in their demand for the right of abode in the United Kingdom.
It has been stated in the FAC report that with the enactment of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act in 1962, the right of settlement in the United Kingdom by Hong Kong BDTCs was removed. In my view, this piece of legislation is fundamentally wrong because it had entirely deprived the British subjects in Hong Kong of their fundamental rights previously enjoyed, and is completely contradictory to the traditional spirit of the rule of law and the legal principles of Britain.