Sa,"
1117
Hong
[ LORDS ]
compromise, perhaps over the phasing, over the er of steps which are taken for the introduction wooratisatiET.
n
of
I do not think that we can go immediately, or, as the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt of Weeford, wants to do, go for broke, 100 per cent. It would be much more sensible to go by degrees, because the important thing here surely is not the precise percentage that is taken as a first move but that the first move leads on to subsequent moves and that those subsequent moves and what they enshrine are secured for all time into the future. In other words, what is most important in the terms democratisation is continuity after 1997, so that we have the commitment of the Chinese Government to back it all the way through and continue its development after 1997.
of
The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, made a most interesting and informed contribution on the Vietnamese economic migrants, and he has done tremendous service in the careful study that he made of this subject. It could not have been easy for Ministers-I know he recognises this fact-to take the decision that they did to return a number of Vietnamese economic migrants by compulsory means. I am sure it is right that they did so. If it is now the case, as appears to be so, that there is some form of agreement for a six-month moratorium, I hope that that will at least provide for the treatment to be given to the new influx of refugees that may be expected from March, because it would be foolish indeed for the international community to close their eyes to the fact that more are likely to come as soon as the weather conditions permit.
I also hope that if there has been this agreement which has been signalled to us this afternoon, it indicates that the United States attitude has changed and that no longer will we have what a senior official recently said to me when I was in Hong Kong: "You must remember that for the United States Vietnam is still the enemy". That time is now past and it ought to have been buried in the past. I agree with those who have said that it is time to look ahead, to give economic aid to bolster up, to improve and strengthen the economy of Vietnam in dealing with this difficult situation.
Lastly, I want to say a word on the nationality package. I support very much the proposals of Her Majesty's Government. I believe that we have this commitment in this country which should be honoured and I would be dismayed if, by one means or another, however contrived, another place were to reject the Government's proposals when they come to legislative form. This is the very least we can do and I think that all Members of the other place should support the Government in the decision that they have taken.
What we have to ensure is that we do whatever we can between now and 1997 to secure and promote the economic strength of Hong Kong. I ask your Lordships to compare the successes of Hong Kong, about which we heard earlier today, with the circumstances which have overcome the people of Eastern Europe or those of other states where freedom of the individual is denied.
Kong
1118
In Hong Kong we have a shining example of a free stern with foc people. I hop: hot it wil no. Jo the long before the Government of China recognise the fact that even though freedom may carry some risks (and what system does not?) a free people, given free choice, offers a much better prospect of happiness for all their citizens and the opportunity for the security of government. That is what we have achieved in Hong Kong and what we shall shortly be bequeathing to China. It must deserve the inheritance that it is gaining.
6.50 p.m.
Lord Derwent: My Lords, I add my thanks to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, for introducing the debate. The fact that the House shows such a continuing interest in the future of Hong Kong is a positive factor in reassuring the people there that they are not forgotten and abandoned.
Apart from giving myself the pleasure of speaking after the noble Lord, Lord Sharp of Grimsdyke, to whom we listened with the greatest attention, I had not intended to intervene in today's debate until I read the intemperate attack on the Governor printed last Sunday by one of our leading newspapers. The report speaks of "furious British business giants" who are alleged to have described Sir David Wilson as a "puppet of Peking" and to have called for his removal from office. The newspaper's editorial described him as a “lack-lustre errand boy”.
I have no direct knowledge of what any British businessman or businessmen may have said to the press and I do not necessarily believe everything that I read. However, as some noble Lords may know, I am closely connected with some of the largest Hong Kong businesses controlled by Hong Kong Chinese people. I declare an interest in that respect. I wish to assure your Lordships that none of my friends would wish to be associated with any such denunciation of the Governor. Indeed, there is considerable admiration for the patient and dedicated way in which Sir David is trying skilfully to advance the cause of the people of Hong Kong. We find it to be profoundly unhelpful when the press or businessmen say anything which may undermine the authority of the man who must negotiate on our behalf with the People's Republic of China.
Tonight I wish to say only that I hope that one of the signals which will go out from this House to the Government in Beijing is that the Governor enjoys the full confidence of all noble Lords.
6.53 p.m.
Lord Bramall: My Lords, I also congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Sharp, on his most impressive and knowledgeable speech and thank the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, for the opportunity to discuss a most important subject.
However much one aproves of the historic agreement on the future of Hong Kong after 1997-and I happen to believe that it remains in the long-term interests of its people-this country will, whichever way one looks at it, be handing over more than 4 million people to the tender mercies and ultimate authority of a form of government
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.