1567
British Nationality (Hong Kong, Bill
19 APRIL 1990
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill
1568
threat to Hong Kong's stability in the period before 1997. Secondly, most of those who are emigrating do so reluctantly, because it is the only means of acquiring the assurance of a foreign passport. Thirdly, most of them would remain if such an assurance were available without the need to leave Hong Kong.
Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing. North): Will my right hon. and learned Friend give an assurance to my constituents. most of whom must live in an already overbulit area and are under severe pressure from Ealing council to build on such free and as remains? Can the Home Secretary assure me that overbuilt areas such as mine will not be pressed into taking even greater populations than they already have to bear and that provision will be made eisewnere?
Mr. Waddington: I shall develop that theme later. First and foremost. this is not an immigration Bill. but a nationalty Bill which is designed to anchor people to Hong Kong rather than to encourage them to come here. I certainly assure my hon. Friend that if the people selected were to come here they would have superior skills and be far less likely to concentrate in large numbers in city centres than, perhaps. people with lesser skills.
Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North): My right hon. and learned Friend has correctly said that the Government's objective is to make it possible for people to stay in Hong Kong, I ask him to put himself in the position of a Hong Kong business man aged between 35 and 40 who has the great good fortune to get a British passport. Such a man. having heard what is being said in communist China now, may feel that that may be a black mark against him when the communist Chinese take over in 1997. Would he not feel disposed to leave Hong Kong early so that he can re-establish his business. his family and his fortune:
Mr. Waddington: I disagree with my hon. Friend. Once a person in a good, well-paid job in Hong Kong has the assurance of a British passport, there is no urgency for him to leave. We must not assume that the worst will happen. Under the joint declaration those who are in Hong Kong after 1997 will have the right to work, the right of abode and the right to travel to and from Hong Kong.
I fully recognise that the remedy which the Bill offers represents an unprecedented departure from the normal principies of our nationality law. We considered carefully whether a scheme leading to entry clearance rather than full citizenship would suffice, but we concluded that such a scheme would not resolve the problem. It would have precisely the opposite effect to that intended and would draw to the United Kingdom the people who were given guarantees. They would be anxious to get their children into Britain while the children were still under age and qualified for entry under the immigration rules. They would be determined to establish the residential qualification for citizenship as soon as possible.
The governor of Hong Kong is convinced that the assurances of citizenship provided in the Bill are the only effective way of restoring confidence and maintaining prosperity, and all the evidence emerging from Hong Kong supports that.
Clause requires the Secretary of State to register up to 50.000 persons recommended by the governor under a scheme approved by Parliament and also to register their
794 CD31 8 Job 2-10
spouses and minor children. Clause 3(3) provides for a committee to advise the governor on the operation of the scheme. Obviously in arriving at the figure of 50.000 the governor rather the Government-have had to make a difficult judgment, but discussions-
Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick. Cumnock and Doon Valley): Sigmund Freud at work.
Mr. Waddington: If the hon. Gentleman would wait just a moment he would not make as big a fool of himself as he did on television last night.
Discussions with Hong Kong since December have reinforced my view that we have got it about right. The figure of 50.000 is a number which is capable of having a real impact on emigration and confidence in the territory, and that is what matters.
Clearly, citizenship granted to the head of a family would be unlikely to anchor him to Hong Kong if citizenship were not granted also to his immediate family. but it is obviously impossible to provide in the Bill for a limit on the number of wives and children. My right hon. Friend has however, given an estimate of the absolute maximum number of people who might benent, which is 225.000.
The 50.000 would be a carefully chosen and highly qualified group of people-in good jobs, earning good salaries. If they decided to settle in the United Kingdom they would doubtless have a valuable contribution to make here. But that is not the purpose of the Bill. It is a Bill designed to persuade them to remain in Hong Kong rather than go off elsewhere in the coming years to acquire another nationality as a sort of insurance policy.
Dr. Michael Clark (Rochford): My right hon. and learned Friend talks about establishing confidence and keeping prosperity in Hong Kong. Does he concede that it is important that the Chinese Government shouid make some moves to ensure that those two attributes stay in Hong Kong? Does he also concede that by putting the Bill before the House he is taking pressure off the Chinese who will see that we are giving relief to Hong Kong while they do nothing!
Mr. Waddington: Obviously there is a joint responsibil- ity. The Chinese Government have a responsibility as a result of what they undertook to do under the joint declaration, but there is also a duty on us. I should have thought that that was plain.
Mr. Win Griffiths (Bridgend): How will the Bill provide un assurance for the 93-5 per cent. of those eligible under the general allocation section as set out in the expianatory memorandum? That figure ranges from the 79 per cent. of those involved in the information services to the 96.1 per cent. of those involved in the education services who will not receive a passport under the scheme. How will they be encouraged to stay in Hong Kong as a result of the Bill?
Mr. Waddington: We will give assurances to people who play a key role in the Hong Kong economy. Anchoring those people to Hong Kong will help to maintain its stability and prosperity. The maintenance of that prosperity and stability will be to the advantage of all those others who have not been selected under the scheme.
Mr. Anthony Nelson (Chichester!: I am grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend, who has been extremely generous in giving way. He will know that many of us who
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.