TNAG-1611-FCO40-2214-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1987 — Page 170

2

seriously. Meanwhile, we have to cope with an increasing rate

of arrival, a declining rate of resettlement, and the existence

in our closed camps of large numbers of people who, after 3, three, four

five f

or even years of incarceration, have forgotten what normal

life is like.

Kingdom

di

Sir, we appreciate HMG's efforts to find a lasting international solution to the Vietnamese refugee problem, and we understand and accept that negotiations will take time.

What we cannot accept, however, is the claim by HMG that 468

that is refugees over the current two-year period (234 refugees a year) represents the limit to the number of refugees that the lenited U is capable of absorbing from Hong Kong, or the claim that

this initiative will encourage other resettlement countries to increase their commitments to taking refugees from Hong Kong. I have received some 60 letters from Lords and MPS expressing

Legislative Council. support for the recent request by the Legee Ad Hoc group on Refugees that HMG should increase its commitment to taking refugees from Hong Kong. Among those letters, I received from

Lord Ennals, the Chairman of the Asia Committee of the British Refugee Council, a copy of a note that the Council has sent to

linited Kingdom's HMG containing its views on the UK's, présent commitment to resettlement. The Council describes the arrival of the 468 refugees from Hong Kong at the rate of only 20 per month as inexplicable, since the previous intake of 40 per month was easily absorbed by the refugee agencies. The Council reports

British Refuse

that initial reaction from other resettlement countries indicates that they find the offer of 234 places in a year to be derisory set against their own existing commitments; and that a figure of 1,000 places in a year, originally proposed by the UNHCR, would have stimulated a far more positive response.

United Kingdom's The Council recommends that the UK's commitment should be increased to include family reunion cases not covered by existing criteria, vulnerable groups such as the handicapped and unaccompanied minors, and hard-to-settle cases. These

recommendations, Sir, are very similar to the recommendations that the begce Ad Hoc Group has been putting forward during the

islative Council

Legislative

le

lc.

lo