151
Foreign Affairs
4 NOVEMBER 1982
age that has been done, and it is the Foreign Office on which we rely to use its pressure to put these matters right. I know that the Foreign Secretary himself is very interested in this subject. The more he travels, the more it will be brought home to him.
Over the past few years, those of us who pressed the Government on this subject were told that it was too early to know what the effect of the increased fees had been. Then we were told to wait for the report of the Overseas Students Trust, which would be a guide to Government policy. The report turned out to be a brilliant document. If, in general terms, the Government were to follow the policies put forward in the report, I should be well pleased. After that, following an early-day motion signed by no fewer than 150 right hon. and hon. Members, I understand that the Government set up an inter-departmental committee which has been meeting during the summer and will report shortly to Ministers.
I shall be glad if, when he winds up the debate, the Minister of State will tell us when the Government will be able to make proposals and when we shall be able to debate them in full. Among the recommendations of the Overseas Students Trust is the suggestion that students from British dependent territories should be treated as home students. This arrangement would be very much welcomed in Hong Kong.
To ease the passage of such a reform the Hong Kong Government have offered to meet some of the cost. In the course of his address to the legislative council the governor said:
"On the basis of the proposals contained in the report of the Overseas Students Trust, the Government hopes to reach agreement with Her Majesty's Government for joint funding of the difference between home and overseas student fees. If arrangements can be agreed, Hong Kong students in Britain will, subject to a means tests, pay the same fees as home students.' The Hong Kong Government are clearly doing their very best to be helpful. I sincerely trust that Her Majesty's Government will take the same attitude.
It is now absolutely clear from the latest figures that Hong Kong students are being diverted from this country to other countries, particularly to Canada and America. A good general guide to the trend of overseas student destinations is provided by the visas issued to first-time students by the immigration department in Hong Kong. These show that of students in all categories 45 per cent. went to the United Kingdom in 1979, 25 per cent. to Canada and 26 per cent. to the United States. In 1981, 21 per cent. went to the United Kingdom, 51 per cent. to Canada and 21 per cent. to the United States. In the category of first-degree students, 651 settled for the United Kingdom in 1979 and 342 in 1981. That is a very sad trend. I only hope that it is not too late to reverse it. It is important that Her Majesty's Government reach a conclusion on this very soon. Otherwise, whatever changes are made will not be operative this time next year, when the next education year commences.
I should like to draw the Minister's attention to a promise made by the Prime Minister when she was in Hong Kong. In his speech to the legislative council the governor said:
"During this Session, members will be invited to consider amendments to Hong Kong's emigration and other legislation as a consequence of the coming into force of the British Nationality Act on 1st January next year. An important related question which still needs to be resolved is the nationality description to
Foreign Affairs
152
be used in passports. The Government continues to urge on Her Majesty's Government the importance we all attach to satisfactory resolution of this issue."
а
Referring to this question of the nationality description to be used on passports, the Prime Minister said at a press conference on 27 October:
"I do not think the Nationality Act changes Britain's commitment to the people of Hong Kong, and I do not think we can change it now, but I understand there is a passport problem which I will look into when I return."
I am sure that the Prime Minister will be as good as her word. I shall be glad to know whether the Minister of State has anything to report.
Finally, as the multi-fibre negotiations are now grinding to a halt, I ask the Government to look again at the question of imports into and exports from Hong Kong. Because of the multi-fibre arrangement, Britain and Europe have, restricted the importation of various categories of Hong Kong garments, greatly to Hong Kong's disadvantage. Hong Kong is a territory which is free of all restrictions, and we take great advantage of that freedom. We export more to Hong Kong, with its population of 5 million, than to Japan, with its population of 100 million. We have that great advantage, and yet we put restrictions on Hong Kong. This might make sense, albeit harsh sense, if it preserved employment in this country, but the gap left has been filled not by poor developing countries but by rich European countries and by the Americans, who do not hesitate to keep out our goods. The arrangement is not even working. It is now time to start again.
5.18 pm
Mr. Donald Stewart (Western Isles): I am aware that the proposed pattern of debate on the Queen's Speech is for Foreign Affairs today, and I will touch on aspects of that subject, but I hope that I may make some comments from a Scottish viewpoint. In seconding the motion on the Royal Address, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) said:
"We are a United Kingdom, and those of us who live north of the border look to Westminster to ensure that in economic, as in constitutional, matters we remain one community." People in Scotland who look to Westminster for help will look in vain. Indeed, in his next sentence the hon. Gentleman said:
"In the North, we suffer from the same economic and industrial ills as the rest of the country, only more so." [Official Report; 3 November 1982, Vol. 31, c. 10.]
Yes, indeed-and that is despite the fact that without the oil from Scotland the United Kingdom would file its petition in bankruptcy, and that even with the oil the Government have gone a fair way towards achieving that end.
According to the Gracious Speech:
"My Government will maintain the monetary and fiscal policies necessary to achieve these ends, including continued restraint in public spending."
are
That is a chilling message without vision or hope. There no prospects of anything being done for the unemployed, yet the Government claim to be "deeply aware of the anxieties and distress caused by unemployment."
Had those words any genuine content, they would have led to action to remedy the Government's appalling record.
As is her custom, the Prime Minister blames everyone else. She claims that world recession is the cause of it all, although she is extremely selective in the countries she names and the statistics she uses. For example, the very
101
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.