364
14 June 1989]
[Mr Tempie-Morris Contd]
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE
RT HON SIR GEOFFREY HOWE, QC, MP, MR R MCLAREN and MR A PAUL
the moral obligation argument and enabled Martin Lee to say clearly the British people agreed with that even if the British Government did not. How do you see the British side. Parliament and the people, and their likely reaction were this to develop?
(Sir Geoffrey Howe) One should not rest any conclusion on this matter on the so-called vote cast in that particular setting on a question formulated with a less than adequate coherence or accuracy. But I do not want to shuffle off our responsibility in that respect. Nor am I seeking in addressing this generally to say the Government need not address this. It is for Parliament. for the people, who will have to try and make a judgment together, but we do have to do that in the light of the best judgment we can form of what opinion and opinion as reflected through Parliament is likely to be. We do know what Parliament enacted in this respect in 1981 and we do know from our own experience what was the scale of the problem produced when we had to handle a much smaller number of emerg- ency immigrations from East Africa in the 1960s. So that one has to make judgments by reference to experience of that kind. Incidentally, it has nothing to do with particular ethnicity; it is the impact on any society of a huge mass of strangers from a different cultural background that one has to take into account. It is the scale and difference of the impact.
Mr Shore
990. Is there not a new aspect to the argument about moral obligation? As I recall it, so far the argument has gone roughly like this. First, we nor- mally grant independence to colonial territories. they then become free and independent and they are responsible for themselves and their people. What is exceptional about Hong Kong is, for the reasons we all understand. that the end of British colonialism is not an independent and free Hong Kong. That is the beginning in a sense of the prob- lem. Next, in order to fulfil Britain's obligation you have already negotiated in many ways a remark- able treaty which for 50 years gives the people of Hong Kong, if it is fulfilled, self-government and autonomy. Therefore, we have discharged our obli- gations to the people of Hong Kong. But now we come-and this is the new point I want to make— to the possibility that the events that occurred in Peking could recur after 1997 in Hong Kong. Would we not then, given the argument that I have just rehearsed, feel that we had a direct and moral responsibility for certainly anyone who was politi- cally persecuted or made a political refugee by Chinese action in breach of the 50-year treaty of which we are the co-guarantor and co-signatory?
(Sir Geoffrey Howe) I think the answer to the particular question that you put there in relation to anyone who became a political refugee in those circumstances must clearly be yes. The responsi- bility of the international community to estab- lished refugees is plain under the relevant UN conventions and clearly the United Kingdom would feel a very special responsibility in relation
Continued
to the people in those circumstances, in face of such events causing people to claim, and rightly claim. refugee status.
Mr Wells
991. Foreign Secretary. I think the shared objec- tive of those in Hong Kong who seek the right of abode here is, in fact, to stay in Hong Kong, so they state, and. indeed, it is very much in everybody's interests that the people of Hong Kong remain there and continue the great social, political and economic success that Hong Kong is. It is extremely difficult, as you have outlined, to con- sider the possibility, in the event of a catastrophe. of accepting or even holding out the possibility of accepting 3.25 million, and I would have thought it is going to be extremely difficult to distinguish those who have BDTC passports and those who have not, and then when they have arrived here why should we oppose their bringing their relatives with them, as we have always granted immigrant groups in this country up to now. So if they did have to come here we are talking of a large number of people. 6 million who reside in Hong Kong now and their relatives who may at the moment reside in the Republic of China, so that we could be talking of 6 million, up to 10 million people, twice the population of Scotland. Faced with such huge numbers would it not be wise for us to seek inter- national help in this matter and try and forge a group of nations together who would say to the people of Hong Kong jointly: “If all goes wrong and we need to offer you political asylum, we as a group of countries will do so"?
(Sir Geoffrey Howe) I think the very scale of the problem as you have clearly spelt it out underlines the seriousness with which one has to address one- self to the question. The phrase "insurance policy" is all too often used in this context as though that in some way entitled one to treat it less seriously. because, of course, an insurance policy is some- thing designed to provide for the most part for something that will never happen. whereas here one has to assume if it is to have any significance at all a claim will be made under the policy by everyone who is entitled. I think that if the worst were to happen then in those circumstances it would plainly be our right and our duty to seek to mobilise the widest possible international support for whatever action was then necessary. I think to try and do that now in relation to a hypothesis we all hope devoutly is not going to happen will neither get the response you want nor help head off the hazard you want to avoid. Think of the enormous difficulty of mobilising a response in relation to the boat people, a measured group of people to be counted in tens of thousands. I was in Geneva yesterday addressing it, it is so hard to secure even a response to that. I think that some- thing comparable to compassion fatigue if you take that example would pertain in relation to the ques- tion you are putting. It is hard enough for us in the United Kingdom with our direct, continued exposure to the Hong Kong question. One understands the hazards of it. Outside the United
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.