HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ——
香港立法局————————一九八九年七月五日
5 July 1989
84
their hands in the mantle of democracy that they know will not fit our case? Am I to assume that this will salve the consciences of the British politicians?
British people are honourable. But their elected representatives in Parliament are making them dishonourable by not telling them the truth about Britain's obligation to the people of Hong Kong. Its obligation cannot be deemed to cease because its lease on 92% of the land is expiring. It cannot govern a place for over 150 years and then sign an agreement to give it away, together with its people, and just seek guarantees for them in the agreement. Hong Kong people were not consulted on whether or not they concurred. Hong Kong people have no confidence in the guarantees given and in what Britain is doing today.
Britain should talk straight to Europe that it has to offer the right of abode to Hong Kong people. It should also stop creating confusion about the numbers by continually putting them in the context of the United Kingdom. Even if all who were given the right were to exercise it, the number would be much smaller when looked at in the context of the population of Europe and that is really what the issue is all about.
Sir, with these remarks, I support the motion.
MRS. FAN: Sir, the Foreign Affairs Committee's recommendations on Vietnamese boat people are welcomed in Hong Kong because it recognizes the inevitability of the screening policy in the face of declining level of acceptance by resettlement countries coupled with the massive influx of boat people, and because it accepted that the logical consequence of a screening programme is the repatriation of those screened out as non-refugees. It went on to propose that assistance should be given to allow returning boat people to settle down in Vietnam and that the Vietnam authorities must deal with them in a humane way. The latter has always been the position of OMELCO, and the former proposal, which I take to mean financial assistance given to returnees by the British Government for reintegration purposes, is reasonable and responsible. The committee had the benefit of the evidence of Sir Geoffrey HOWE after the Geneva conference, and rightly pointed out that the conference may have solved the Vietnamese refugee problem, but not the Vietnamese boat people problem. We agree.
Indeed the problem of boat people had escalated since the committee took evidence in Hong Kong in April. During May and June, the monthly arrival exceeds 9 000. No reprieve is in sight for July and August, the popular season for boat people to come into Hong Kong waters. The Geneva conference's
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.