§ 2.54 p.m.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government on what grounds the British Embassy in Santiago declines to provide safety to political refugees in Chile.
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, it has been the long-standing practice of successive British Governments not to give asylum in Her Majesty's Embassies to the 442 nationals of other countries: this is a general principle which is applicable to all our Embassies in all countries.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while thanking the noble Earl for that Answer, may I ask him whether the attitude of Her Majesty's Government can be summed up in this way: that while it is not consistent that we should provide refuge to opponents of a Government with which we have relations there are many precedents where that has been done? Is it not a fact that every other European Government in Santiago has provided this refuge for those who have been standing for political democracy in Santiago? Is it not entirely exceptional that our Government should refuse refuge to those who have been standing for political democracy?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I cannot answer for the actions of other Governments, but I can tell the noble Lord that the principal function of an Embassy is to maintain relations between Governments, and it would be an abuse of their proper role if Embassies came to be used as refuges for opponents of the very Government with which we were trying to maintain relations.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, would not the noble Earl agree that this sounds very much like Munich?
§ LORD HALEMy Lords, does not the noble Earl recall that in the dark days of Budapest the British Embassy won the plaudits of the world by providing the sacred right of sanctuary to refugees in a very dangerous situation from Russian guns and among them my friend the late Peter Strasser, a member of the Austrian Parliament, and his bride? If it could be done then, why are persons seeking sanctuary from persecution finding the door barred against them under the Union Jack?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I can only repeat to the noble Lord that the purpose of an Embassy is to maintain relations between ourselves and the country in which the Embassy exists. It would not be the proper function of the Embassy to open its doors to grant asylum to people who are opponents of the particular régime at the time.
§ LORD GLADWYNMy Lords, would the noble Earl consider publishing in Hansard a list of the Embassies in Santiago which have admitted political refugees during the recent crisis and those which have not?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I can only tell the noble Lord, Lord Gladwyn, that what other countries have done is a matter for themselves, but that does not necessarily affect what we have done.
LORD INGLEWOODMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether the Embassy admitted refugees on any scale during the previous Marxist leadership in Chile?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, could the noble Earl say whether Her Majesty's Government, as a result of their representations, are satisfied that the Government in Chile is now taking a more reasonable attitude towards refugees? Are the Government satisfied with the reaction of the Chilean Government?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, we made representations to the Chilean Government and explained to them the very strong feelings in this country over the death of President Allende and others, and the many people who were arrested. The Chilean Government offered us assurances that it would deal in a humane manner, in accordance with the due processes of law, with all those who were in detention and with those in political opposition. So far as I know, our Government were the only Government which obtained a public assurance of this kind from the new Government.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the Government obtained a public assurance, but can the noble Earl answer my first question as to whether the Government are satisfied that the obligations undertaken by the Chilean Government have been fulfilled?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, the Chilean Government can only operate within the Chilean law, and it would not be appropriate for the British Government to intervene.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, would the noble Earl please answer my ques- 444 tion, which was quite simple: are Her Majesty's Government satisfied that the obligations given to them by the Chilean Government are being fulfilled?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I think that it would be improper for Her Majesty's Government to comment on the internal affairs of another country.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, then there can be only one construction following the noble Earl's reply.
§ LORD SEGALMy Lords, are the Government aware that something like 13,000 refugees who are not Chilean at all but citizens of Uruguay, Bolivia and other South American countries were attracted to Chile by the Allende Government? Would it not be an act of humanity on the part of the British Embassy to offer refuge to those citizens who are not Chilean subjects and desire simply to find sanctuary from persecution by the existing Chilean Government?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, if any Chilean wishes to come into this country he can apply to do so and his application will be dealt with in the normal way, but I would only say to the noble Lord, Lord Segal, that a time when we are in fact restricting the entry of people who are members of the Commonwealth might not seem the most appropriate time to allow a large influx of people from other countries.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, would the noble Earl refer to the speech made by the noble Lord the Leader of the House. I think last Wednesday in the debate on refugees? The noble Lord the Leader of the House then gave us a much more helpful reply than the one the noble Earl has now given.
§ LORD WINDLESHAMAgain, my Lords, we have had a very full discussion of this important question. I did refer to this matter in winding up the debate on refugees, and the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, referred to it when he opened from the Opposition Front Bench. I think it will be seen that what I said is in substance the same as what has been said by my noble friend today, but the tone and the atmosphere of the House was somewhat different.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, in view of the question put from the 445 Liberal Benches, asking for a list of the countries which have accepted refugees, would the Minister agree that the following European countries have accepted refugees in Santiago and retained their embassies: Sweden, Italy, Belgium, Holland, France, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Austria and Switzerland, in addition to countries in other parts of the world?
EARL FERRERSMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for providing that information. I shall certainly be quite happy to draw the attention of my right honourable friend to the strength of feeling which has been expressed in this House.