§ Lord AVEBURYMy 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 whether it is their policy to remove to Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) holders of United Kingdom passports who flee to the United Kingdom from Zimbabwe with a view to avoiding conscription into the Armed Forces of the illegal reéime.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Harris of Greenwich)My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have no fixed practice in circumstances such as these but give careful consideration to each case on its merits.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, surely this is a matter of principle. Are the 2 Government really saying that there are circumstances in which individuals will be sent back to join the Armed Forces of the illegal régime of Rhodesia and thereby, if the negotiations which we hope will be successful are not successful, prop up the continued existence of that régime which for 10 years we have been trying to put down? Particularly in the case of Mr. Desai last weekend, whether or not evasion of the draft was the principal motive in his coming here, do not the Government think it was grossly unfair to him to send him back to face what may be severe penalties for coming here in the first instance and evading the papers which were served on him?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHNo, my Lords; I do not think we take the same view as does the noble Lord on the last point in his supplementary question. So far as general practice is concerned, the situation is this. We will look at every case on its merits, but we cannot ignore the potential size of the commitment to admit anyone who applies to come here because he does not wish to serve in the Rhodesian Armed Forces.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, is it the case that the Government consider every case on its merits? Is it lot the case that they consider it only when it is referred to the Home Office by a Member of the other place or this House? Is the Minister aware that I have recently taken up a case which had been refused entry at Heathrow, but upon consideration the 3 Home Office accepted it? Before a decision is reached at Heathrow, would it not be desirable that cases will be referred to the Home Office?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, the immigration officers act on the basis of immigration rules. If any approach is made by a Member of either House, then either my right honourable friend the Home Secretary or one of his colleagues will look at the circumstances of the case. So far as this narrow issue is concerned, until May of this year we had received no applications from Rhodesian citizens to enter or remain in this country on the grounds of wishing to avoid military service.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is it not a something of a misnomer to describe Rhodesia now as an "illegal régime", when in fact Her Majesty's Government are sponsoring a conference and recognising the existence of Rhodesia?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, that is a rather wider question.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, the noble Lord has said that he had received no case of a person who wished to remain here in order to avoid a call-up. If that is so, will he look at the case of Mr. Archie Coleman and Mr. Selwyn Quarrie who originally arrived here in May and who have been on IS96s ever since, reporting regularly to the police every week? Will the Minister consider the possibility of testing the bona fides of people who say they are conscientious objectors by bringing in the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, notwithstanding the fact that these people are not de jure refugees?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, as I have indicated, until May of this year we had received no applications of this kind. I will look at the two cases that the noble Lord has raised and will study the suggestion that he has made or will ensure that my honourable friend the Joint Minister of State will do so. What I have said indicates that we are prepared to look at every case on its merits. We consider that that is the appropriate way of dealing with these matters.
§ Lord BEAUMONT of WHITLEYMy Lords, is it the policy of Her Majesty's Government not to discourage recruitment to the Forces of a régime in rebellion against the Crown of this country?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, what I have indicated is that we are not prepared to indicate that we will admit anyone who wants to come here simply because they do not wish to serve in the Rhodesian Armed Forces. Such a commitment would be a very substantial one and I do not think we could lightly enter into it at the present time.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, appreciating what the Minister has said, that the immigration officers at Heathrow are given rules to act by and that their task is very difficult, may I ask whether it is not clear in cases of this kind—and I have knowledge of the two cases raised by the noble Lord, Lord Avebury—that the immigration officers should consult with the Home Office before they decide to send a person back rather than wait for a Member of Parliament or a Member of your Lordships' House to raise the matter with the Home Office?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I think it would be going too far to say that no immigration officer should take a decision on his own account, for this would slow down the administrative processes by which it is decided whether or not to admit a person. I hope that I have indicated that the Government are prepared to look at cases on their merits and that we will do so in the future as we have done in the past.