Hong Kong Citizens and British Passports (Hansard, 24 April 1989)

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, as I told the noble Lord on 23rd March, the reason we do not propose to grant right of abode to 3.28 million Hong Kong British dependent territory citizens is that we do not believe that there would be sufficient support in this country for wholesale changes to the law which would entail the prospect, albeit a theoretical one, of large-scale immigration from Hong Kong.

§ Lord Wyatt of Weeford
My Lords, the Government previously maintained that they did not wish to issue more passports to Hong Kong citizens for fear of offending the Chinese Government. Will they now welcome the clear declaration by the Chinese Foreign Minister, after the debate in your Lordships' House, that the Chinese Government would not be offended at all and that it was entirely a matter for the British Government? Will the Government now look again 1059 at their policy, as the Portuguese authorities have done in Macao, of issuing passports to Hong Kong citizens?
Are the Government also aware that all informed opinion in the journals of this country believes that the Government are behaving dishonourably over the matter? There is growing bitterness in Hong Kong, with people turning against Britain, which is to the advantage of others and not ourselves. Will the Government please now stop pretending that there is any real difficulty about the matter and examine it again?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, the remarks which were alleged to have been made by the Chinese Foreign Minister to the Hong Kong press on 22nd March are, I think, those to which the noble Lord refers. They made clear, as he has done, that the question of granting right of abode in this country to Hong Kong British passport holders is a matter for Her Majesty's Government. Nevertheless, I hope that the noble Lord will not fail to take into account that the matter of nationality is very sensitive for the Chinese Government.
As to the concern the noble Lord expressed on behalf of many about the policy causing considerable resentment in Hong Kong, I can tell the House that I am fully aware of that concern. The mood is quite apparent to all who are involved, even though the provisions that exist in our British Nationality Act are not new and are not aimed specifically at Hong Kong people. I hope the noble Lord realises that if we were to go so far as he suggests, well over six times the number of people granted full British citizenship in the ten-year period from 1977 to 1987 would be involved.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, I fully support the original Answer my noble friend gave. Is he aware that far from the action of Her Majesty's Government being dishonourable, it is entirely in keeping with the spirit of the agreement which we made a few years ago with the Chinese Government?

§ Lord Glenarthur
Yes, my Lords. I am grateful to my noble friend. As I said in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt of Weeford, just now, the matter of nationality is one of great sensitivity with the Chinese Government. Indeed, their position is set out in a Chinese memorandum on passport and nationality matters associated with the joint declaration, which states that under Chinese nationality law, All Hong Kong Chinese compatriots, whether or not they are BDTCs, are Chinese nationals".

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, is it not ironic that 100 million Germans and Italians will shortly be able to come to this country without let or hindrance, yet we refuse to grant that right to 3.2 million Hong Kong citizens who have always been loyal and have never fought against this country?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, no one is disputing the loyalty of the Hong Kong Chinese. What I would dispute, though, is the histories of all those countries 1060 concerned and the reasons the various rules such as those which affect the Portuguese in Macao have come to exist.

§ Lord Eden of Winton
My Lords, in view of the horrors which the Chinese Government are presently inflicting upon the people of Tibet, is there not some justification for nervousness, to put it mildly, on the part of the people of Hong Kong? Will the Minister therefore exercise a degree of flexibility in the matter and assure the House that he and his colleagues will examine it again?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I believe that although the matter of Tibet might cause concern, it is a red herring. The histories of Hong Kong and Tibet are totally different. As regards looking at the matter again, I have explained that I believe there would not be sufficient support for the kind of move which is proposed. Nevertheless, we shall no doubt study the report of the Foreign Affairs Committee of another place when it emerges in due course.

§ Baroness Ewart-Biggs
My Lords, in view of what the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn, has said and the very real anxieties felt by the people of Hong Kong, as evidenced by the high degree of emigration, can the noble Lord say what measures Her Majesty's Government intend to take in order to allay those worries? Will the Minister state whether there is any case for the introduction of a bill of rights in Hong Kong which might make the people there feel better prepared for 1997? That has already been mentioned by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I do not think that I can comment on the suggestion about a bill of rights in Hong Kong. At the moment, as the noble Baroness will be aware, the basic law drafting committee has submitted its second revise, which is being examined through a consultative process.
As regards the basis of the suggestion that the British Nationality Act be amended, as I have said, that would be a difficult matter. I very much doubt whether the kind of proposal put forward would command sufficient political support or be acceptable to the public at large.

§ Lord Wyatt of Weeford
My Lords, does not the noble Lord understand what the Chinese Foreign Minister said? He said that in exactly the same situation as with regard to Macao the Chinese Government are not at all concerned about the number of passports we issue to Hong Kong citizens. Will the Minister not also understand that there is no question of 3 million people coming here from Hong Kong? All they want is a key to the prison, if necessary. They do not wish to live here at all. They want to be able to tell the Chinese Government that if that government do not behave according to the agreement after 1997, those citizens have a way of getting out. Therefore the Chinese Government will take care to behave properly.

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I understand both those points. The noble Lord has made them with great clarity many times. However, I must tell him 1061 that his suggestion that not all those 3.28 million people would take up the opportunity to come to this country would be rather a curious basis upon which to embark on new legislation.

§ Lord Taylor of Blackburn
My Lords, a British Parliamentary delegation is, I believe, in Hong Kong at the present time or is leaving Hong Kong today. If that delegation made a recommendation that Her Majesty's Government should look again at the British Nationality Act, what would be the view of the Minister?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, we shall have to see first what the recommendation is.

Viscount St. Davids
My Lords, would the noble Lord have any objection if the Hong Kong citizens who wish to have British passports came to this country with passports as Portuguese?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, as I understand it, they would not be Portuguese under the circumstances which the noble Viscount mentioned.

§ Lord Mishcon
My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that his definition or description of the Chinese and their treatment of Tibet as a red herring was a somewhat unfortunate phrase to use? Does he not consider that, instead of our giving the impression not only to Hong Kong but also to the whole world that we have let down the people of Hong Kongin this respect, he should consider with his right honourable friend the clear possibility of limiting the right of residence to one generation and the limit of any immigration at all to a certain figure per year that we can well command and authorise? Finally, is the noble Lord not aware that this could be a proper condition for a British National (Overseas) passport to contain?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, as regards the first supplementary question of the noble Lord, he will be well aware that the history of Tibet and the history of Hong Kong cannot be directly concerned in this matter, although, of course, we have made clear our views upon what has happened in Tibet in recent months. On the suggestions which the noble Lord made concerning the British Nationality Act, these are all subjects which no doubt will come to the fore again when the Foreign Affairs Committee of another place reports. I cannot anticipate that because I have not seen what the committee will say. However, I can tell the noble Lord that even the suggestions he has just made are ones which might, in all the circumstances, be quite difficult to achieve because of the very reasons I gave earlier that they may not command sufficient support in the country both in Parliament and elsewhere. I believe that that encompasses the third point the noble Lord made.

§ Lord Bonham-Carter
My Lords, is it not the case, as the noble Viscount, Lord St. Davids, said, that if the people living in Macao have been granted Portuguese passports, they would be allowed, as members of a country which is a member of the EC, 1062 to come to this country? Is it not therefore rather unfortunate that those who are Portuguese citizens are put at an advantage over those who are British citizens, even if they are British overseas citizens? Is it not the case that the French have also given passports to those of their employees who are living in Hong Kong? Does it not appear that this country is behaving less generously than any other country in this respect?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, that may be the point of view of the noble Lord, but I do not think he can make the comparisons he has and imagine that they are valid comparisons because the nationality laws relating to the two countries have long been different. The nationality law of Portugal differs from our own, in that Portuguese nationals in Portuguese overseas territories have always had the right of abode in Portugal. That situation existed long before the signing of the Sino-Portuguese Joint Declaration on Macao.

§ Lord Wyatt of Weeford
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that Hong Kong citizens had exactly the same rights as Portuguese overseas nationals until 1962 as regards having a British passport? After that date we took it away. Is it not dishonourable to allow Falklanders and Gibraltarians to keep their British passports while depriving Hong Kong citizens of theirs when they are in exactly the same position? None of those lands wanted to be independent; we have forced independence upon Hong Kong,

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, we are not forcing independence upon Hong Kong; that is the whole point. The fact is that Hong Kong is reverting to China under the terms of the lease which expires on 30th June 1997. I do not think it is possible to make the comparisons which the noble Lord draws. He is well aware of the history of this matter. There have been several changes to our nationality laws since 1960, the most recent being in 1981.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that there is no question of either the Falklands or Gibraltar leaving the Commonwealth?

§ Lord Glenarthur
My Lords, I am sure that is absolutely right.