353
Debate on the Address
24 NOVEMBER 1989
Tiananmen square, last June, except to say that I felt great personal sadnessrat what happened: As a young diplomat, for two happy years I lived a few hundred yards from the Gate of Heavenly Peace, and ever since I have felt strongly the fascination of China and of its people. At the same time-some 35 years ago—I came to know Hong Kong. I fully realise that it has transformed itself several times since then, but I know of no other place in the world that has the same mixture of glitter, hard work and adaptability.
i
W
[*.**
There is no doubt that confidence in. Hong Kong suffered a heavy blow in June and we look to the. Chinese autnonues to co-operate fudy with us in restoring it. We are doing what we can to provide the people of Hong Kong with the reassurance that they seek, and I shail give the cetails in a moment. Alongside their concerns for the future, the people of Hong Kong face an urgent and growing problem in the present. Here too they look to Britain for assistance and support. I refer to the presence in Hong Kong of almost 57,000 Vietnamese boat people, which is placing an unacceptable strain on Hong Kong's patience and resources.
Some argue that all those who arrive in Hong Kong by boat must by that fact alone be refugees entitied to settlement in the West that argument ignores the ream of the situauon. The nature of the outflow from Vietnam has changed in recent years. Most of those now arriving in Hong Kong by boat are farmers and fishermen from North Vietnam in searco of a better life. They have no connecuon with the former South Vietnamese regime or with the United States and in most cases have no particular reason to fear political persecution. They are not refugees by the cntena ublished in the 1951 United Nations convenuon, and western countries have for that reason shown increasing reluctance to accept them for
resettlement.
That is why, at the Geneva conference in June. the intemational community cecced that all new amvais in Hong Kong should go through a screening process, to determine whether or not they are refugees. There were comments to resettle all those found to be refugees. taciucing the 13.500 with refugee status already in Hong "ang, within three years. Two thousand new places were
in the United Kingcom. It was made clear also, cepted by all the countries represented at the erence, that those who are not refugees should return o Vietnam.
The screening procedures are being followed thorough- ly and fairly with the full involvement of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Hong Kong bas no interest in keeping down the number who qualify as refugees. However, on the basis of the resuits so far, it is prozasie that around 40.000 of the 57.000 now in Hong Kong will not qualify. They will not be resettled, and it sure:y cannot be humane or possible to leave them indefinitely in camps in Hong Kong. The reality is that their only future home is in Vietnam.
+
It would, of course, be better if people who are not deemed to be refugees returned to Vietnam voluntarily, and we are doing everything to encourage them to accept that it is in their own intere: to do so. However. Hong Kong now has more thas one year's expenence of Screening and it is evident that voluntary repaination alone cannot match the sea.e of the problem.
༢༩
la common with my two predecessors as Foreign Secretary, my nght bon. Friend the Member for
19" CD176 Job 2-2
Debate on the Address
354
Huntingdon (Mr. Major) and my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Sir G. Howe), I have looked long and hard at the problem in the hope of finding an easier answer.. We are continuing closely to, consuit Vietnam and the authorities in Hong Kong, and all that I can add today is that we have been forced to reach the conclusion that we cannot responsibly avoid the difficult question of involuntary repatriation. In practice, we are increasingly left with little choice.
རྞ་།,
་
་ frr ཡ་
LI
Mr. Robert N. Wareing (Liverpool, West Derby): Has the Foreign Secretary considered the option of developing with our international partners a development package for Vietnam itself? What is wrong with training, the Vietnamese who have gone to Hong Kong seeking a better life and the allowing them to work in Hong Kong as contract labour, in the same way that British subjects work under contract in the Guif states? Would that not be more humane than forcibly repatriating people in a way that would not be considered for one moment by the West German Government in respect of East Germans from Leipzig and Dresden?
Mr. Hard: The pessie who are returning to Vietnam now under the voluntary arrangement are receiving beip with resettlement. That is a perfectly sensible principle and one that could be extended. I am not excluding that principle when i say that we are in touch with the Vietnam Government. However, I prefer not to go into further detail at this mute.
I return to the future of Hong Kong itself. We continue to regard the joint declaration-an achievement in which my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Surrey, East played a primary role as the best available foundation for our policy in Hong Kong. China also remains committed to the joint declaration. No alternative bas been offered that would be capable of safeguarding Hong Kong's stability and present life. I ask the critics of this or that aspect of our policy in Hong Kong whether they accept at the joint declaration is the best foundation and, with it, the consequences of the way in which we handle ourselves in respect of parucular matters. Or do our critics have some other foundation for the future of Hong Kong that would enable us to indulge in popular gestures as if China did not exist or as if 1997 is of no importance? If so, perhaps they will tell us what that other foundation is. It is no use saying, as some do, “If I were you. I wouldn't start from here." We must start from the geographical and histonai facts.
If the joint deciarauca provides, as we believe it does. a valid and viable basis for Hong Kong's future, Britain has a crucial responsibility in working to implement it successfully. That will be card and trying work. There is no question of our sitting back and saying, "It is all up to the Chinese Government. There is nothing that we British can do or say."
We are working to strengthen confidence in three main ways. We are preparing, as the House knows, a scheme of assurances to gve key people in the public and private sectors the confidence to remain in Hong Kong. We shall fulfil our responsibilites for the зdministration of the territory, taking full account of the wishes of the people of Hong Kong. We are reviewing the pace of democratisation in Hong Kong, and the Hong Kong Government will soon publish a B of Rights. Finally, we are seeking the support of our friezas and parmers for Hong Kong's future
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.