TNAG-1845-FCO40-2620-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-enquiry-1989 — Page 48

as I

34

Portuguete

Se Hlement

It is in

great contrast

to countries

extremely

Certain

х

22 March 1989]

[Mr Jopling Contd]

THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

RT HON SIR GEOFFREY HOWE, QC, MR ROBIN McLaren, CMG, and Mr Alan PAUL

change which was applied in the end in relation to all Dependent Territories and all ex-Dependent Territories, Commonwealth countries. It is for that reason, I think, that the 1960 changes in the law had that effect on the people of Hong Kong. I continue to believe, and set out in the memor- andum-although certainly we hear the calls that come from Hong Kong for change-that it would not be realistic to think in terms of presenting to this Parliament a piece of legislation providing for the automatic right of residence in Britain of million inhabitants of Hong Kong, even if, as the document says, most of them concerned had no present intention of exercising it.

Chairman

58. I think what interests the Committee is whether there is not a middle way here. One sees the provisions of the 1962 and 1971 legislation and the 1986 British Nationality (Hong Kong) Order, but do you feel we are being as flexible and under- standing about this as we should? Obviously it is not a question of what the Portugese do-they have 100,000 and that is it. It is not a question of 3.28 million British Dependent Territory citizens being given right of abode, but is there perhaps a case for something a little more flexible than seems so far from what we understand to have been the policy?

(Sir Geoffrey Howe) I think one has to recognise the difficulty of trying to identify any different resting point. Let me make another point of dis- tinction. We are by definition from the legislative history I have just described a country that has sought to exclude immigrants for settlements for reasons Parliament has accepted under governments of all parties. It is great countries like the United States, Canada or Australia that have sought to attract immigrants for settlement. One simply cannot make the comparison between them. It is extremely difficult to identify any legislat- ive change that would identify a resting point different from where we start. As you know, there are arrangements whereby different people from Hong Kong and elsewhere are able to enter Britain and to enter in certain circumstances for settle-

ment, people wishing to study, people coming in as businessmen or self-employed, people who are willing to invest substantial sums of money and so on. I think you have the documents before you, and there are certainly very limited areas where a discretion exists in the Home Secretary. But again that is available only in very narrowly defined cir- cumstances. I have obviously thought about this a great deal and I know it is a matter of very active consideration in Hong Kong, but it is not easy to identify any resting point.

Mr Rowlands

59. You rested the case primarily on history. I recall as Minister for Dependent Territories in my Foreign Office days the general argument was that, in fact, most of the Dependent Territories would be moving to independence, thereby creating their own citizenship. That was the basic distinction.

27

[Continued

You have in the case of Hong Kong people where that process cannot happen, cannot be.

(Sir Geoffrey Howe) You have a different feature, do you not, because independence was never an option for Hong Kong The destination for Hong Fullstop. Kong was reversion to Chinese sovereignty and it is one of the features on which China, understand- ably, is most insistent, that they are compatriots, they are people who enjoy and will enjoy Chinese alone in this-has never welcomed the idea of dual citizenship. China, in fact—and I think it is not

citizenship, and The achievement of the legitimacy of the BN(O) passport, which is more than a docu- ment--it is something that will carry with it the prospect of British consular protection-is itself something over and above what would have been implied from the absence of independence as a destination. That, I think, is why Hong Kong in this respect, as in many others, is different.

Chairman

60. Is there any truth in the reports that have appeared in some papers that other European Community countries are now prepared to issue passports and right of abode to Hong Kong citizens who at present have BDTC citizenship, and if that is going to be the pattern-the French have been mentioned in particular-might that not under- mine the situation?

(Sir Geoffrey Howe) I have seen a newspaper report to that effect and I do not know whether it is true or not, I am afraid. The ability to make that kind of offer, of course, depends absolutely fundamentally upon the ability to be precisely selective. That,in a way is the pattern on which the other countries, such as Canada, Australia and the United States, are offering the prospects of citizen- ship, because they are engaged in an active immi-

. The

but

That 15 Ne difference

We an

Talking

abah

as it did

gration policy. I dare say that if we wished to engage in an active immigration policy for outstanding talents from Ruritania Parliament- would not object to that because by definition it would be a selective and purposely British scheme, but this Committee will understand that the claim of an obligation of 34 million people, which, Parliament turned aside in the 1960s, is different from the rest of the Commonwealth. I think Mr Rowlands' point is a legitimate one when he says that they had independence as a prospect, but for Hong Kong there was dependence and re-absorption into China as a prospect.

that

do find Chairman: I think our worry is we have thought, as indeed you have recognised./the Hongha Kong situation is unique, certainly in the history of the former British Empire and Commonwealth and, indeed, in all history, as far as one can make out, and is a matter to which the Committee will wish to return. Could we though, as time is going on and you have been very patient in answering our questions, turn to the question of Hong Kong policy towards the vexed matter of the Vietnamese boat people. Mr Lester?

think this