Patten's Hong Kong plea is rejected
Residency rights: Government and Opposition unite to rule out UK haven for 3 million citizens
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Government and the Labour Party yesterday united swiftly to reject a call by Chris Patten, the governor of Hong Kong, for over 3 million British citizens in Hong Kong to be given the right to live in the UK.
Michael Howard, the Home Secretary, said there was "no question" of extending the right given four years ago to 50,000 prominent citizens in the colony, and added that firm decisions had been taken when the issue was "extensively discussed" at the time.
Speaking on GMTV, he added: "We would make available the possibility of coming to this country to 50,000 heads of families. That was the decision reached then. We don't intend to change it. There is no question of giving 3 million people in Hong Kong the right to live in this country."
Under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990, some 50,000 heads of families - including civil servants and businessmen - were given the right to a full British passport.
The Act was passed with the strong support of Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary, in the face of stiff opposition on the Tory back benches and from a number of Cabinet ministers who would have preferred a lower figure of 30,000 despite the Tiananmen Square massacre of June 1989, which inflamed fears in the colony.
The debate reopened after Mr Patten, a former Cabinet minister, said at the weekend that Britain should give right of abode to the 3.3 million Hong Kong people holding British Dependent Territories passports. He denied this would prompt an immediate influx of immigrants.
"I don't think the 3 million Hong Kong citizens are suddenly going to arrive at Heath-row. Nobody seriously supposes that, and to be blunt if they did they certainly wouldn't be living on a welfare state," he told BBC Radio 4's Any Questions? programme.
Jack Straw, the shadow Home Secretary, yesterday reaffirmed Labour's opposition to the proposal but claimed that Mr Patten's remarks on a special edition of the BBC's Question Time "must raise questions about his own confidence in the stability of the arrangements he has put in place for after 1997".
A spokesman for the Hong Kong governor insisted last night that there was nothing new in Mr Patten's statement, and British government sources were also at pains to argue that he was reiterating the position of the Hong Kong government, and that there was no special significance in the timing.
The governor's remarks came a week after elections in Hong Kong which produced a convincing majority for candidates standing on the pro-democracy ticket. Mr Patten has made it clear that he will have to accommodate some of the policies advocated by those who triumphed in the election.
The democrats have consistently campaigned to give the right of abode to Hong Kong's British passport holders. It is therefore possible that Mr Patten made his remarks with an eye to this constituency.
The democrats were cautious in their response to the governor's statement, but Martin Lee, leader of the Democratic Party, was quoted by a local newspaper as saying: "He said it, and we expect some action."
Leading article, page 14
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments