CONFIDENTIAL
of the Hong Kong authorities' claims that all the returnees had been made aware of what was happening to them and what options were open to them. But I wonder whether there may be a gap between what senior officials believe is happening and what actually goes on inside the camps. I wonder too if we might be overestimating what the boat people understand when they are told about screening, volunteering, etc. There could well be a case for better coordination with UNHCR and more checks that the boat people really do understand the information disseminated for their benefit.
8. Lord Ennals and Mr Raison surprised themselves, I think, by the extent of their agreement on the content of the report. From the
start they had rather different views on it. Mr Raison wished to
stick closely to the remit given in the Secretary of State's
statement of 12 December 1989, and was keen that the conclusions
should flow directly from evidence gathered in that context. Lord
Ennals, on the other hand, would have been happy for the report to
roam more widdy than an assessment of conditions for the 51 returned
on 12 December. He would have included more detailed comments on
the voluntary return programme and on the "Orderly Return Programme"
which he and Mr Alf Dubs recommended in their report to the British
Refugee Council in October 1989. There was a risk at the start of
the mission that Lord Ennals and Mr Raison would be unable to agree
on a report to which they could both put their signatures although
this faded as both accepted the importance of unanimity.
possible ways of avoiding such potential problems in the future
would be:
Two
(a) to include a third signatory, preferably a non-politician.
With three members of an investigating team, there is the
opportunity for an arbiter to reconcile differences of opinion.
(b) to confirm in writing the commission for such an
investigation and its terms of reference.
Palio Cart
P L Carter
MR3AJA
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.