TNAG-1540-FCO40-2104-Further-resettlement-of-Vietnamese-refugees-from-Hong-Kong-i-1986 — Page 26

!

1

CONFIDENTIAL

5. There are already clear signs that the hiatus in our

offtake from Hong Kong which occurred last month (when we

took no refugees from Hong Kong for the first time in over

a year) will have a negative effect on resettlement (and

potential resettlement) countries. The Canadians and

Australians have both told us specifically that their decisions on further resettlement next year will depend on whether the UK takes more. M. Hocké hinted to my officials while he was here that he might again declare Hong Kong a priority area for 1987 - but only if the UK again made a significant contribution to resettlement. It is clear

that the resettlement countries and UNHCR look to us to

continue playing our part in resettlement rather than, as

they tend to see it, seeking to "offload" our

responsibility for Hong Kong's refugees on to them.

6.

I have summarised the position at some length because

I recognise that in presenting any continuing UK resettlement commitment publicly and at Westminster we

need to show that we are also pursuing a wider international solution to the problem. I recognise also

that such a commitment presents difficulties for you in immigration terms particularly given the problems that

Vietnamese resettlement in the UK has already shown up.

But I believe it is essential that when David Waddington

and Tim Renton meet which I agree they should do soon

there should be no misunderstanding as to what Hong Kong,

the UNHCR and the resettlement countries expect of us.

The size of the commitment is open for discussion

small monthly off take would be more useful in

international terms than a further numerical ceiling on

SCORRI lines. But a specific commitment of some kind for Hong Kong is required, beyond our RASRO and other general

commitments, if we are to fulfill our obligations towards

-

a

/Hong Kong

CONFIDENTIAL