1
THE HOME AFFAIRS SUB-COMMITTEE ON RACE RELATIONS AND IMMIGRATION 139
4 February 1985]
[Chairman Contd.]
MR R LUCE, MP, MR A C Galsworthy, DR D C WILSON and MR D Carter
ago) and the assumption that their first wish might be to continue to live (but in future on a permanent basis) in Hong Kong, I do not believe that that is necessarily the right assumption. It is true, of course, that the Hong Kong Government, who carry first responsibility for the refugees, have agreed to settle 14,000 in the past. However, our evidence suggests that many of them would rather go to live in other places and not necessarily Hong Kong (the United States and other parts of the world, perhaps Austrailia and elsewhere). I think that that assumption is not necessarily right. You then ask me a very important question about their future, as we see it as a Government. I feel bound to say that the position of having something like 6,000 refugees in closed camps, and perhaps 5,000 or 6,000 also in open camps (but particu- larly I refer to the closed camps), is such that no Minister could sit here and say to you that it is satisfactory or desirable. It is not. Nor is it satisfactory or desirable for the Hong Kong Government. Therefore, our objective must be to try to obtain a durable solution, and as fast as we possibly can. I am, of course, perfectly prepared to go over the ground, if you so wish, at a later stage, as to why we have closed camps, but I am trying to answer your long-term question. Our objective must be to try to get this problem settled, so that we do not have refugees in either the closed camps or the open camps. That clearly must be our objective. I hope, in saying that, that I have answered all your questions, but I am not sure whether there was not a third one.
215. Was there any consideration of the refugees in the negotiation of Peking?
(Mr Luce.) If you are referring, Mr Wheeler, to the agreement itself, no. The agreement, of course, was about the future of Hong Kong. Above all else, as you know, an agreement was reached about the need to provide for the continuity of systems in Hong Kong, including their laws. So if you are asking me the question "Was the question of Vietnamese refugees a subject of discussion?", no, it did not form part of that. I think I should perhaps stress that there are two points from this. One is that we would hope to have this problem of the refugees settled well before 1997.
216. That inevitably must be the as- sumption.
(Mr Luce.) That must be our objective.
[Continued
The second point that is worth making is that even if there were refugees there, the agreement with China provides for the continuity of laws and systems. The last point that I think it is well worth observing is that the Chinese Government's record on receiving refugees, including a large num- ber of Vietnamese-Chinese refugees, is a very important one.
217. Those are important points for which I am most grateful. Before my colleagues join in our discussion, I have two points to put to you. First of all, with regard to those in the closed camps, whom this Committee visited, I think we were ap- palled to find children being born into these closed-camp conditions. The conditions are extremely humane, and there is no question but that the quality and condition of those camps is very high (and I for one speak as someone who is familiar with prison set- tings over many years and in many coun- tries). Conditions are very high. But the fact that children are born into those closed conditions, and are still there some three, four or five years after their birth, is something which is abhorrent and quite unacceptable. We have to resolve that prob- lem. The second thing is that Mr Hunt, who may choose to put his own question on this point, visited the open camp I think he will say that he found there were people in the open camp who were in fact working within the economic enviroment of Hong Kong and, for all intents and purposes, were part of the economy, and thus had established their roots. So there are two distinct points. There are some people who, by the very nature of their work experience in the Crown Colony, are, for all intents and purposes, Hong Kong citizens; and there are others who are born into these camps under circumstances that I think we all find absolutely intolerable. What is your com- ment?
(Mr Luce.) Mr Wheeler, can I first of all say that I myself have also visited two camps, one closed and one open: Chi Ma Wan on Lan Tao Island, and Kai Tak which my people have visited and which, of course, is an open camp. I cannot help but share your anxiety about the continuation of conditions in these camps, which the Hong Kong Government cannot avoid. In my view, they took the right decision, which we sanctioned as a Government: that we had to have closed camps introduced as from the summer of 1982, as a policy of humane deterrent. There seemed to us to be
ce
A
I
Lantaar
X
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.