TNAG-1069-FCO40-1319-Resettlement-of-Vietnamese-refugees-from-Hong-Kong-in-the-UK-1981 — Page 83

843

VOL 424

Vietnamese Refugees:

DATS

22/14/81

[ LORDS]

Vietnamese Refugees: Attacks by Pirates

HKK 243/2

3.20 p.m.

RECEIVE AMORY HO, $1 Lord Renton: My Lords ef leave to ask the Question which stands in my name the Order Paper.

The Question whs follows: PA

DESK OFFICER

lation Taken

To ask Her Majesty's Goverment whether the will consult with other Governments in order te bring to an end the attacks by pirates upon Vietnamese boat people, so many of whom have thus been massacred or drowned.

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, we are already doing so. We are taking part in consultations which are already under way in Geneva between interested Governments and agencies under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Lord Renton: My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that welcome reply, may I ask whether Her Majesty's Government will make it clear to the Government of Vietnam that their oppressive régime, which has caused so many people to take to the boats and to go on the high seas, is made even worse by their tolerance of these pirates who act in such a brutal way to the distress of civilised countries?

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, we appreciate the tenor of my noble friend's supplementary question and, of course, we deplore these particularly brutal attacks. We are satisfied that the other two Govern- ments which my noble friend did not mention--that is, the Thai Government and the Malaysian Govern- ment are very conscious of the gravity of the situation and we welcome the steps already taken by those Governments to control piracy in their own waters.

Lord Brockway: My Lords, does not this situation point to the need for a United Nations peace-keeping force with a naval arm to stop piracy not only this case, but in similar cases? As regards the Vietnam boatmen, will the investigation at Geneva include an inquiry into the ownership of the syndicate which, as evidence before the United Nations Refugee Com- mission has shown, has charged £3,000 per person to go on these crowded boats which are often sunk and has bribed officials to allow them to depart? Will an inquiry be made into that?

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, I was not aware of the details referred to in the question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Brockway. However, if he would like to furnish me with the relevant details, I shall most certainly bring the matter to the attention of not only the consultations in Geneva but also, of course, my right honourable and noble friends.

Lord Shinwell: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the apparent appointment of the Red Cross to deal with this shameful situation seems a bit odd? Is that the appropriate organisation to deal with the matter? Is the noble Lord also aware that, apart from the shameful attacks on the Vietnamese boat

Cous 843-844

Attacks by Pirates

90

844

people, piracy on the Nigerian coast and in the region of the Gulf has become almost a national passtime? Moreover, is he aware that it has been considered by international shipping interests, including the British Council of Shipping, and that it appears that the only remedy available would be to arm members of merchant vessels or those associated with liner companies trading in that area, so that they can deal effectively with these pirates?

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, we shall, of course, consider the most interesting suggestion put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, in the second part of his supplementary question. However, so far as the Red Cross is concerned, I understand that the Red Cross is included in the talks in Geneva because it is that organisation which deals with the effects of the piracy rather than the piracy itself.

Lord Monson: My Lords, will the noble Lord say in approximately what proportion of cases the Thai or Malaysian authorities have captured those respon- sible for these atrocities and put them on trial?

Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, I am afraid that I have no information on that point.

Future Business: Companies (No. 2)

Bill

Lord Bruce of Donington: My Lords, I rise to ask the Government a question on business of which I have already given notice concerning the business on Tuesday 27th October, on which day your Lordships will notice that we are due to consider the Commons Amendments to the Companies Bill. My principal question is to ask the Chief Whip or the Leader of the House what further facilities they propose to offer your Lordships in order that these matters may be properly discussed.

When the Companies Bill started in this House, there were 62 clauses. By the time it left this House, there were 75 clauses. By the time it left the Standing Committee in another place, there were 79 clauses and, by the time it was completed, there were 126 clauses. On Report in another place, some 13 entirely new clauses were introduced and some very substantial amendments were inade to clauses already incorporated in the Bill in Committee and by your Lordships' House. In total, your Lordships will be invited to consider some 242 amendments to the Companies Bill, which is due to come before your Lordships' House on Tuesday.

I am given to understand from the Vote Office that the amendments will be not available to your Lordships until tomorrow, which leaves us Saturday, Sunday and Monday to consider the implications of the various amendments that have been made. I submit that this is entirely unreasonable. The Companies Bill in this House received the detailed attention of your Lordships from all sides of the House, and I think that it is generally agreed that the Bill went out from this place a good deal better than it came in. It is for consideration as to whether consideration by your Lordships of this Bill should be postponed, because