5
Hong Kong
5 JULY 1989
aintain eir position in the Hong Kong economy. That a mat to which many people attach a great deal of :portance.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for reminding e House of the extent to which the United States should cept its fair share of responsibility for the Vietnamese >at people. The United States representative at the eneva conference, Mr. Eagleburger, said:
"Those who flee clandestinely and cannot establish a well unded fear of persecution must understand that such flight › longer leads to resettlement.” ich
persons e continued:
will face an indefinite stay in a holding camp.
"It is important for those thinking of fleeing the former orth Vietnam to realise that most will fail to qualify as fugees and will therefore not be eligible for resettlement." ut he stopped there, and, in our judgment, that is the rong place at which to stop. If they are to be categorised the way in which the United States and others have ›ne, as not entitled to treatment as refugees, it must be ght to try as we are doing, to secure a method for them > return to a secure future in their homeland.
Mr. David Howell (Guildford): It is obvious, and has een for a long time, that it would be completely npractical for Britain to provide a right of abode for 3.25 illion or many more Hong Kong people-a point which ny right hon. and learned Friend has been making with <reat patience and courage in Hong Kong these past few lays. Therefore, does he not share with me some regret hat an orchestrated and expensive new campaign is yet gain being mounted in Hong Kong and London to hammer home this single unattainable point?
Does not that distract the people of Hong Kong from concentrating on the many more positive possibilities which are now opening up for the future prosperity of Hong Kong, including persuading the international community to underwrite assurances for the future security of Hong Kong and providing passports for certain hard working key personnel to stay in Hong Kong. Contrary to the views of the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman) those people are not the elite or the rich, but those who are most dedicated and vital to maintain the administration of the territory in the coming years.
Sir Geoffrey Howe: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his observations and for the work of the Select Committee, over which he presided. He was quite right to draw attention, as he did in the Committee's report, to these two distinct factors: first, the importance of seeking the widest possible international assurances against an eventuality which we all hope will never happen; and secondly, as the Committee said, an immediate need to provide assurances to those people whose presence in Hong Kong by reason of their skills and qualifications in both the public and private sectors, is vital to its continued prosperity. I hope that those who may be contemplating a sadly distracting campaign, of the kind to which my right hon. Friend referred, will think again about the wisdom of doing so.
Mr. Paddy Ashdown (Yeovil): May I first welcome the Foreign Secretary's commitment to a Bill of Rights, and secondly, may I welcome the fact of his visit to Hong Kong? It clearly would have been much worse if he had not gone, but how much better it would have been if he had not gone with an empty hand and a closed mind. Surely his
169 CD89/3 Job 1-5
Hong Kong
316
total failure to reassure anyone in Hong Kong, from the most senior expatriate downwards. cannot but have the effect of undermining the credibility of our administration in Hong Kong, of accelerating the flight of capital and brains from the colony and of placing in jeopardy our long-term strategic interests in the entire area.
I ask the Government now if they will study the interesting report by Professor Bernard Corry, which outlines the economic benefits to Britain of honouring the right of abode, and I ask them for a response to it. Surely that is a much more rational way of approaching the delicate question of nationality than the sort of scaremongering that we have heard from the Government and from the Labour party.
Sir Geoffrey Howe: The right hon. Gentleman is not very perceptive in his observations: he denounced my visit for having been undertaken with an empty hand, having immediately preceded that by congratulating me on the firm commitment to the Bill of Rights, which was one of several things on which I was able to give some assurance to the people of Hong Kong. I have dealt with the others in my statement.
If the right hon. Gentleman studies the Corry report, he will find that it deals separately with the economic aspect and that, in a very qualified judgment, it states:
"The feasibility of such a large migration therefore seems to be shown from an economic point of view". It goes on to deal with what it calls management and logistical issues and clearly says that many of the problems that arise are exactly the same as those that I identified in my statement. The right hon. Gentleman would be wrong to conclude that the report offers any sort of support for his proposition, which is, on the whole, rejected on both sides of the House.
Sir Peter Blaker (Blackpool, South): Although the whole House understands the anxieties of the people of Hong Kong, may I add my voice to that of my right hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Mr. Howell) and say that it is perfectly clear to almost every Member of the House that Parliament would never pass the legislation necessary to give the right of abode to more than 3 million citizens of Hong Kong? I am sure that I speak for many friends of Hong Kong in the House when I ask whether it is not time, therefore, for the leaders of Hong Kong to study the alternative thoughts of my right hon. and learned Friend about an international operation to deal with the issue of abode, about how to push forward the Joint Declaration and obtain a good Basic Law, and about how to formulate a Bill of Rights which, I agree with my right hon. and learned Friend, is an important proposal?
Sir Geoffrey Howe: I am grateful for my right hon. Friend's support in that respect. I think that he should not respond too unsympathetically to the position of the leaders of the people of Hong Kong. He will understand as well as anyone the impact of the shock of the past month on the attitude of those in the territory. He will also join me in acknowledging that they have already shown themselves capable of responding in many respects to the need for leadership which their people are expressing. hope that they will respond-I have some confidence that they may to the kind of advice that my right hon. Friend has given them. It is important that they should
1.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.