Argument
4
The present arrangement is illogical in that it makes a distinction between those from Kwangtung and those from other provinces. This division dates from the time when we had a unilaterally imposed "quota" and is no longer valid. The present arrangement. is also irrational in that it appears to be more forthcoming than necessary to those who come here from China allegedly on visits only.
5
Since we now face a major problem with the flow of immigrants, it seems sensible to make our conditions for landing immigrants more restrictive than they are at present. If we now limit permission for landing essentially to the period laid down in the Chinese travel documents (usually 3 months), we ensure that those who stay longer have to put up with the inconvenience and expense of regularly asking for extensions. It would not be practical to remove forcibly those who wish to stay beyond the period they are initially given (just as it is not possible to remove illegal immigrants who have "reached base"). On the basis of experience it seems likely that those who are landed on limited stay will apply for an extension of stay before the time limit set out in paragraph 3 expires and will not go underground. Never- the less, the opportunity of granting extensions can be used to question those concerned about their reasons for staying on in Hong Kong and, where possible, encourage them to return to China
6
There is an additional factor. When the Ambassador in Peking spoke to the Vice Foreign Minister about immigration on 15th December, the latter suggested that Hong Kong should look into the possibility of returning to China those given permits to visit relatives in Hong Kong who did not return within the period of validity of their documents. When the PA made parallel representations to the NCNA on the same day, the latter also made a point of claiming that the Hong Kong Government made it too easy for those who had been allowed to come as visitors to stay on as permanent residents. Although these remarks were probably intended more as debating points than anything else, they do have some validity in that our present policy is not as restrictive as it can be. We cannot expect that the new policy will produce any great reduction in the number of those who stay on. Nevertheless, it would help to make it clear to the Chinese both that we take the problem seriously and that we have taken account of their counter- representations.
7
If we are to adopt this new policy towards legal- immigrants, we must have a similar policy for illegal immi- grants. Otherwise we will only succeed in forcing legal immi- grants, who have outstayed the period they are initially allowed, bito pose as illegal immigrants in order to be allowed a longer stay.
DA
CONFIDENTIAL
機密
CONFIDENTIAL #2
機密
XCC(79)3
Cost and benefits
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.