1647
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill
19 APRIL 1990
Hong Kong. We stay in close touch with China and I make no apology for that. We seek to influence China and I agree that in that respect we have a big task ahead of us. We have no wish to pick quarrels with the Chinese or to complicate the transition to the eventual transfer of power. The constitutional arrangements for the start of the democratic process in Hong Kong next year showed that policy of ours in action. We were much criticised and have been again today the Opposition and the press in London for reaching an understanding with the Chinese on that point. Yet my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford supported me on that occasion, as did other sensible people. I think that we were right. The House should not take it that, between now and 1997, we will simply listen to every view from Peking, whether whispered or shouted, and then follow it. We did not act in that way on the constitutional question, as those who followed it know, and we shall not act in that way on the nationality question.
We are using many means to persuade the Chinese of our good faith and good sense in putting forward the Bill. Once they see that a spoiling exercise will not succeed I hope that they will come round to share our view of the Bill's ments. The truth of the matter is that we must act between now and 1997 on the judgments that we, as trustees for Hong Kong, make on what is best for Hong Kong. I do not believe that the House would wish it otherwise.
The right hon. Members for Sparkbrook and for Manchester. Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) came back to the issue of democracy. I believe that the policy that they now advocate is unreal. Compared with the White Paper of 1988, we have speeded up our plans, as the right hon. Member for Gorton acknowledged, for democratic reform. In the past few months, the Government had to choose to make a steady start towards democracy in the Legislative Council next year in a way that will be sustained and improved by the Basic Law after 1997. I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Guildford that we shall look for opportunities for improvement before then, for example, in 1995. The choice was between making a start next year in a way that could be sustained and improved or starting next year at a higher level, which would have been immediately denounced and eventually reversed by the People's Republic of China. The more I think about it, the more I think we were right in our conclusion and that view is increasingly shared in Hong Kong.
It has been argued that the attitude of the People's Republic of China to the Bill will make the scheme unworkable. We have taken pains to explain to the Chinese that the main objective of the scheme is to stem the exodus of talented and enterprising people from Hong Kong and thus maintain Hong Kong's stability and prosperity. That is one of our obligations under the joint declaration. The provisions of the joint declaration and the Basic Law state that British and other foreign nationals may continue to serve in or be recruited to all but a small number of top posts in the future Hong Kong special administrative region Government. China is willing-it is in the Basic Law-to accept that up to 20 per cent. of the Legislative Council after 1997 can be foreign passport holders.
The right hon. Member for Gorton referred to recent statements by the Chinese on consular protection. We shall ensure that the interests of British citizens will be
1648
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill
protected to the fullest possible extent under international law. The joint declaration and the Basic Law provide that people in the SAR after 1997 will have the full protection of the law, including basic human rights as enshrined in the international covenant on civil and political rights and the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights.
The question is whether Hong Kong people are free to come and go as they please. Freedom of movement is guaranteed by the joint declaration and the Basic Law and they provide that Hong Kong people
"may use travel documents issued by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, or by other competent authorities of the People's Republic of China, or of other states."
I promised to deal with the question of international support. Hong Kong is an international centre and it has huge international investment, and its major trading partners have a strong interest in its continuing stability and prosperity. On that basis, some countries, already of their own
volition, have started to provide such international support and we have encouraged others to do so. Singapore has already introduced a scheme covering up to 25.000 heads of household. Within the European Community France has already implemented a scheme to provide for the right of entry to employees of French companies and their families. In the past few days the Belgium Government have announced a similar scheme and Germany and Luxembourg are finalising schemes broadly of the same nature. The House may know of the proposal being considered by the United States Congress that would enable Hong Kong people granted the right to settle in the United States, up to 20.000 a year, to defer settlement there until 2002. Such measures, whether they are specifically tailored to Hong Kong or reflect the general immigration policies of the countries concerned. are helpful. Taken together. they couid already add substantially to the impact of our scheme.
A number of Governments are still considering schemes —this is a continuing effort on our part, and, we hope, on theirs. However, it should be clear to the House that while it was right for us to take the lead, our scheme will have substantial backing from others. If the Bill were to fall, as The Times leading article said today, others' efforts would also be liable to fall.
British citizens from Hong Kong will have exactly the same rights as any other Community country citizen to work and settle in any part of the European Community. I have been asked about that. When we speak about those who might come here from Hong Kong as a result of the Bill, by "here" we mean not just Britain, but anywhere in the EC. We can imagine that a sizeable proportion of those who come will go to other EC countries.
I shall refer next to the main thrust of criticism from my right hon. and hon. Friends who have spoken against the Bill. I think that they would accept that in the past four months I have never joined in any criticism of Conservative Members who criticised our proposals, because I strongly endorse the need for firm but fair immigration controls. I believe, to quote our manifesto, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford did, that firm. fair immigration controls are essential for harmonious and improving community relations. I have not only preached that policy, but practised it, in contrast to the right hon. Members for Sparkbrook and for Gorton
839 CD31 48 Job 13-7