constructively used. The pressure has been on us to have 40 per month on average arrivals and this has taken priority.
Secondly, your point about authority to decide priorities is based, I assume, on a misunderstanding of the non government agencies role in this programme in the UK. As outlined in point 5, Refugee Action takes the responsibility for the settlement and in particular the housing without any risk to HMG. They do not provide deficit funding or guarantees of housing. Also our priorities are not just to do with Hong Kong- we will soon be looking at refugees in camps in other countries. Housing availability is in fact the main factor with length of stay in camps and those in closed camps being other secondary factors. If 40 a month average is to be maintened we will have to continue to put housing top of the list.
Thirdly, you comment on page 2 about call forward is based on a a lack of understanding of the process in the UK. We call forward through the family reunion coordination office weeks before you hear from the UK Immigration official about the call forward -we speak of different steps in the process.
Fourthly, your concern with the people who have waited for years in open camps in shared by us. We have thus made sure that 40/month on average were leaving Hong Kong. In fact in November 1985 Refugee Action called forward relatives from Hong Kong before B1 was really ready for the programme to start. All the refugees accepted by B1 will we hope come and the sooner the better - two constraints must be remembered: a) the Immigration office in Lunar house can only process 60/month which we put forward and b) housing offers are slow and difficult to generate. I am going to discuss with B1 the possibility of truely working to an average number (don't throw up your hands in horror) because housing offers do not come in a continuous curve but rather in discontinuous lumps (like modern physics). Therefore some months we could call forward many more than 40, others less, and we might this way actually increase the rate of arrival. It all depends on Bl's staff time and therefore their ability to look at more than 60/month.
You know that you and I will differ in our views of the impact of the closed camp system on the refugees, but I am sure that we have a common aim in settling people from Hong Kong as quickly as possible. I hope that this letter will make clear to you the fact that it is the non government refugee agencies who take the leading role here in settlement and, before that, in persuading HMG to take people at all. The present family reunion programme is not the end we must continue to ask HMG to do more to move people out of camps in Hong Kong. I hope that we will work together on this. I know that the Hong Kong Government Office in London see our having a common aim in this regard.
I trust that this will be the beginning of a fruitful dialogue and that in the end we will all succeed in doing away with the need for refugee camps of any kind in Hong Kong.
By the way, I have visited Hampton Court House since my return from Hong Kong and the girl whom I saw in Bowring Camp is doing very well. In fact
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.