210
IMMIGRATION AND TOURISM
detained in closed centres pending their resettlement overseas. Those in the closed centres are not allowed to seek outside employment; visits are regulated, and, for their own protection and common benefit, refugees have to abide by rules governing the daily running of the centres. Families split between open and closed centres are allowed to be reunited in closed centres.
A new closed centre, the Bowring Closed Centre, opened in March on the site of a former army camp in the western New Territories. The four main closed centres accommodated a total of 4 420 refugees at the year's end.
At 1112, the number of arrivals from Vietnam dropped by half compared with the figure for 1984. This encouraging reduction remained consistent with the fall in the rate of arrivals since the introduction of the closed centres. In addition, the growth of the Orderly Departure Programme from Vietnam, the general decline in resettlement prospects, and the efforts of the Vietnamese Government to discourage illegal departures, appear to have played a part in this trend.
During the year, only the United States, Canada and Australia continued to provide an ongoing resettlement programme for Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong. Other countries accepted small numbers of refugees for family reunion or because they had been rescued at sea. A total of 3 953 were resettled from Hong Kong in 1985, compared with 3 694 in 1984. In response to the recommendations contained in the SCORRI (Sub-Committee on Race Relations and Immigration) report issued in Britain in 1985, the British Government announced in September that it would relax its family reunion criteria in respect of Vietnamese in refugee camps in countries of temporary asylum and accept about 500 refugees under this category from Hong Kong for resettlement in the United Kingdom. The British Government also announced that it would consider accepting, in addition to the family reunion cases, a further limited number of Vietnamese refugees from Hong Kong in the light of the willingness shown by other resettlement countries to respond to Hong Kong's needs and of all the circumstances at the time. The Hong Kong Government also agreed to consider accepting for settlement in Hong Kong a limited number of ethnic Chinese from the refugee centres, if this could form part of a package aimed both at reducing drastically the size of Hong Kong's refugee population and at resettling all those whose stay in centres here had been prolonged. Following the British announcement, a major effort was mounted by both the British and Hong Kong Governments to persuade other countries to offer more resettlement places to Hong Kong. The initial reaction was encouraging.
Accommodating Vietnamese refugees in closed centres continued to place its own financial burden on Hong Kong, costing the government $92.8 million in 1985. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) contributed $18 million to the cost of maintaining refugees in these centres. The Hong Kong Government also worked closely with the UNHCR and the voluntary agencies in an effort to improve the educational and vocational training programmes provided for refugees in closed centres with the aim of enhancing their resettlement prospects.
For those 4 543 who had arrived in Hong Kong before the change in policy in July 1982 and who were still stranded in Hong Kong three years later, life continued in the two open centres much as before. Refugees in these centres are not confined, and adults are allowed to take up temporary employment with which to support themselves and their families, with few restrictions upon their movements within or without the centres. Resettlement from the open centres continues, but at a very slow rate. In October, the International Rescue Committee took over from Caritas Hong Kong the management of the Jubilee