TNAG-0319-FCO40-355-Legislation-for-immigration-and-deportation-in-Hong-Kong-1971 — Page 268

SCM Pist

Amendments to the Immigration Bill

The extensive amendments introduced in Legislative Council vesterday to the Immigra- tion Bill go a good way towards meeting the many objections voiced when it made its first appearance in July.

We are told that the Bill was not a sudden measure, introduced as a retaliatory measure against new British legislation as some people believed, but was six years in the making and

a good deal of thought went into its preparation.

Not surprisingly Government officials now blame public "misunderstanding" for much of the initial adverse reaction. But the fact that the Attorney General yesterday moved extensive amendments in committee suggests that the Bill needed a good deal of straightening out and tightening up before it could become law. The public outcry thus served its purpose.

Immigration laws understandably reach deep into the hearts of all citizens for they determine the conditions under which we live in a community.

No one wants to live under the shadow of a capricious authority who may terminate his stay for any reason and while it is not suggested that Government has acted frivolously lightly in this matter in the past, it is essential to produce laws that do not leave room for gnawing doubts or far-fetched fears.

ог

The amendments yesterday by and large restore the assurance that the original Bill lacked.

Some have pointed out already that the precise definition of "a person wholly or partly of Chinese race" may prove difficult and it can only be hoped that this will be interpreted as broadly and fairly as possible.

As Mr Oswald Cheung said in his second reading speech the most significant change con- cerns those defined as Chinese residents who have been resident here for seven years.

The Director of Immigration, Mr W. E. Collard, has pointed out, however, in the case of Chinese residents, although they may have to wait for seven years for a belonger's status they are entitled to apply for a Hongkong Certificate of Identity and this guarantees right of return.

In the last five years almost 1.5 million of these Certificates have been issued and are accepted as valid travel documents in 40 countries. In practice, therefore, the non-belonger experiences little disadvantage.

If there is any reason to quibble it is that the Bill did not go one step further and eliminate the distinction between Chinese resident, U.K. belonger, Commonwealth citizen and alien and allow all to qualify as Hongkong belongers on an equal footing after seven years residence, subject to the same deportation provisions.