§ 2.45 p.m.
§ 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 how many names of Uruguayan refugees have been submitted to them by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' representative in Buenos Aires since the appeal by the High Commissioner in June 1976, and how many of these have been accepted.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Harris of Greenwich)My Lords, the Home Office has records of 66 applications in respect of Uruguayan refugees having been submitted by the representative in Buenos Aires of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. In 44 cases the applicant has gone elsewhere. Six have been granted clearance, but three of these fall within the 44 to which I have referred.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, is the Minister aware that I know of only one case out of the 66 applications from persons of Uruguayan origin who has been accepted? Further, does he know that, 1032 since the coup, 70 refugees from Uruguay and Argentina have been abducted; that 10 of them have been subsequently murdered, including the distinguished Parliamentarians Hextor Gutierres Ruiz and Michelini; and that another 10 of them have been illegally repatriated to Uruguay, where they are at present incarcerated? In view of these facts, does the noble Lord not think that the Home Office should give particular attention to the Uruguayan refugees and should speed up their processing, as the Home Secretary promised to do when he saw a deputation on this matter on 30th November last—to which he promised to reply in writing, but which reply is still awaited?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, in response to the noble Lord's first supplementary question, the figures I have given indicate the true situation. So far as the second point made by the noble Lord is concerned, the situation is that some of the people who applied to enter this country also applied to enter a number of other countries, and have indeed entered them. On the noble Lord's last point, the Home Secretary and his predecessor have both indicated that there must be a personal acceptability test for people applying to enter this country. That was the position then, and it remains the position today.
§ Baroness EMMET of AMBERLEYMy Lords, is the Minister aware that I have great sympathy with the Home Office on this question? I have just spent a month in Uruguay, which is full of refugees from the Argentine and from Chile, and to distinguish between one lot of refugees and another must be extraordinarily difficult. The Minister has my full sympathy.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, the position is that we wish to be as helpful as possible in this matter. The Government responded within a month to the appeal made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. But I must emphasise that there must be a personal acceptability test, and that remains the situation.
§ Lord HANKEYMy Lords, in spite of what the Minister said, will he make 1033 sure that none of the Uruguayan refugees accepted here is a former member of the Tupamaro movement, who might very well add to our terrorist problem?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I have already indicated on two occasions, but I am glad to do so for a third, that there is in fact a personal acceptability test in the case of applications of this sort, and there is obviously a need for such a test.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, is the Minister aware, in contrast to what the noble Baroness has said, that Senator Church has said that Uruguay is the biggest torture chamber in Latin America? Is it not the case that anyone can be sentenced to ten years' imprisonment or exile for a political opinion, and therefore should not Her Majesty's Government give the fullest possible opportunity to refugees from this military dictatorship to come to this country?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, I have indicated that we recognise that in South America at the moment there are a number of refugees who are anxious to enter this country. We are anxious to be as helpful as possible in this matter, subject to the qualification I have already made.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, would the Minister not agree that, under the mandate of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, terrorists are not acceptable and, therefore, prima facie, none of the 66 names submitted to him could have been a Tupamaro? While I do not dispute the right of the Government to apply a test of personal acceptability, does not the fact that 44 of these refugees have been accepted elsewhere indicate that the processing of other countries is a great deal swifter than that of the Home Office?
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHNo, my Lords; I think we have absolutely nothing to apologise for in this matter. The Government responded with speed to the appeal made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees—within a month.
§ Lord AVEBURYNo, my Lords.
§ Lord HARRIS of GREENWICHMy Lords, the noble Lord may say "No"; I am saying "Yes". The situation is that the British Government have a responsibility to ensure that people entering this country do in fact meet the personal acceptability test which has been laid down by the Home Secretary. That is a responsibility which he has to Parliament, and it is one he proposes to honour.