425
[Mr. Robert Parry]
Hong Kong
5 DECEMBER 1984
are homeless or living in boats. I hope that for housing, social security, pensions, social services, welfare and the health service, the Hong Kong Government will make a positive attempt to improve them without prodding from the British Government to do the right thing.
During our last debate I spoke about the freedom of conscience, religion and association. This is dealt with in paragraph 46, page 37 of the White Paper. I mentioned that the Catholic Bishop of Hong Kong was concerned with what may happen in the colony after 1997. In China there are many christians, Catholics and non-Catholics, bishops and priests who have been held in prison for many years. I hope that every effort will be made to guarantee that after 1997 those people will have the right to freedom of religion.
8.25 pm
Mr. David Howell (Guildford): I fully share in the admiration expressed on all sides for the work of the Foreign Secretary and his team in securing the agreement. There is no doubt that in difficult circumstances he secured the best possible agreement. Nor is there any doubts that if things go right, the prospects for the future stability and prosperity of Hong Kong and that part of the world will be bright, especially with the opening up of the giant Chinese markets for the development of trade and
commerce.
I shall concentrate on the international dimension, to which the bon. Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Deakins) addressed his interesting and perceptive remarks. By that I mean four things. Hong Kong is one of the key parts of the world's financial and trading system. It is one of the wealth-creating centres of the planet. It is a source of physical wealth and a range of new ideas. It is interesting that Hong Kong inspired the Foreign Secretary in a former role to develop his idea of enterprise zones, which have been introduced in the United Kingdom and now in the United States. Fourthly, it is the home of millions of free people, businesses and of tens of thousands of families, many of whom have tasted oppression in the past and clearly remember what happened in Shanghai.
So the autonomous survival of Hong Kong, without any undermining by the Communist party, is internationaly vital. There is international interest in the survival of ar autonomous Hong Kong. It is not merely a matter of pride, duty and interest here and in Peking, although it is also those things.
If there is an internationally vital requirement it needs two things. First, it needs a strong, internal SAR government, as many hon. Members have rightly observed. Minds will have to be made up not only on the ideas in the latest White Paper for the Legislative Council but on the Executive Council and the governorship before 1988. A decision will have to be made about whether there is to be a gubernatorial type of government with one figure in charge în 1997 or whether it is to be a government of a different sort. It will be essential for that government to develop. While the development may take time, the decisions must be made during the next two or three years. If the Peking cadres are to be kept from infiltrating the structure of government in Hong Kong, as they will naturally do, a strong government is essential.
Secondly, international interest and commitment must be secure. Some people will tell us not to worry about that,
Hong Kong
426
because Japanese and American capital will pour in as it is doing already. That is true, but the money will go out as fast as it has come in the moment when it is felt that the world has lost interest in the future of Hong Kong and that the special autonomous region is sinking back into the grey mass of greater China.
So we have an important task. We must ask ourselves what we can do. A number of suggestions have been made. I shall repeat some and make some new ones.
First, I like the idea of the annual report to Parliament that the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) and others have mentioned. It should be a report about the work of the joint liaison group and about internal developments. Indeed, I think that we should insist on that. My right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary should adopt that as a Government commitment and procedure.
Secondly, it must be right that there is involvement by the Hong Kong people in the joint liaison group perhaps not immediately, but in due course. We shall need to press for that. Thirdly, the Hong Kong people must be allowed to help to draft the basic laws. I hope that my right hon. and learned Friend's optimistic assessment of that possibility is right and that that will happen, as it is essential. Most importantly, Hong Kong's autonomy as a separate region, with a separate political, trading, commercial and legal system must be underpinned internationally.
That means, in particular, two things. First, it means that the assertion made by my right hon. and learned Friend very strongly that what is written and settled is an internationally legally binding agreement must be made a living and continuing reality. Secondly, it means that there must be some means of ensuring that Hong Kong SAR passports are accepted everywhere, like the passports of any other sovereign state. There are two sides to the travel documents question. One is the issuing of them and the other is getting the international community to accept them. It is vital that SAR passports should be recognised throughout the international community.
I have mentioned a few things. The point I wish to emphasise is that it is within our power to achieve them. It is not true that all the cards remain even now in Peking's hands. In this debate I have detected signs of that dismal fallacy — a fallacy of the past that has no relevance today—that where there is no sovereignty, there is no influence. Any trade, diplomatic or financial negotiator or banker will confirm that that is not so. But the perpetuation of that fallacy has caused this country great grief and harm.
I am all for realism in recognising the future position of Hong Kong as an SAR of China, but realisın must not become defeatism or disinterest. I fear that that would be the possibility if some of the views expressed in the del were taken to their logical conclusion.
I believe that the agreement is the best that could be secured. However, this is not the time for opening champagne or for celebratory self-congratulations. If that tone has crept into the debate on some occasions, I regret it. The Chinese proverb says,
“Never praise a day before evening.”
There is much wisdom in that when we look ahead to the enormous tasks on which we are only just now embarking in dealing with the future stability, security and prosperity of Hong Kong.
We are at the beginning of a very long and arduous journey to ensure the survival and prosperity of what has
226
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.