TNAG-2118-FCO40-3024-Future-of-Hong-Kong-general-1990 — Page 137

05/02 90 16:30

* 11 928 0018

BC C

05

So

S

times, as I think about what is happening, I wonder whether I am thinking in language which over dramatises and exaggerates the situation, but I am astonished at the kind of medieval assumptions which seem to underlie the whole process. That the New Territories, a piece of real estate ceded to Britain in 1897 for a period of 100 years, must return to China, is unobjectionable; there is a contractual and treaty obligation for this to happen. But that the people living on this territory should be simply transferred along with it, as though they are in some kind of serfdom which binds them to the land, without any need to consult them about the terms on which this should happen; without giving them an option about whether it should happen, would, I had thought, have been inconceivable in the 20th century, but apparently it isn't.

That, I think, is what lies behind the press reports, comments made by trained and experienced observers and commentators, who, as far as I can see, have nothing to gain by over dramatizing or sensationalizing their reports:

Kevin Hamlin in the Independent of Nov 6 speaks of "a territory that is straining hard to spot a glimmer of light at the end of a long black tunnel. It is unfortunate for them that Britain has done so little to honour its obligations".

Alan Hamilton in the Times, about the recent visit of the Prince and Princess of Wales "At a private lunch with members of the colony's Executive and Legislative Council, he was made aware of the two burning issues - of the right of abode

But in his public utterances, he only hinted obliquely that he knew of the problems".

Jonathan Braude speaks of "resentment over Britain's refusal to grant 3.27 million British citizens in the territory the right of abode in Britain".

Kevin Hamlin again in the Independent of Nov. 8 says the emotional fever pitch after June 3-4 "has been replaced by a stoicism that holds Britain an irrelevancy. Most are now resigned to the notion that Whitehall and Westminister's 'moral responsibility' towards 3.5 million British Passport holders in Hong Kong will count for little after 1997".

Christopher Lockwood in the Telegraph of Nov. 7, after reciting a number of failures to act, concludes "the British are coming to be despised in Hong Kong but it is not too late for the Government to salvage some degree of honour".

Our concern is not that our Government should salvage some reputation; it is that our Government should act honourably; and that is the intention which lies behind the resolutions.

Bill of Rights,

The resolution asks for the enactment of a Bill of Rights with international guarantees. It does not specify how this should be done, since that area of responsibility is the Government's.