1 Introduction
Background
to the inquiry
1. This inquiry was launched in July 2014 to mark
the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Sino-British
Joint Declaration, which set out arrangements for the transfer
of sovereignty over Hong Kong from Britain to China. It was preceded
by a one-off oral evidence session with Martin Lee QC and the
Hon. Anson Chan, two of the most prominent leaders of Hong Kong's
pro-democracy movement, who met with us during their visit to
London in July. Since the handover of sovereignty over Hong Kong
in 1997, the Foreign Affairs Committee has maintained a strong
interest in Hong Kong's development. Our predecessor Committees
published reports including evidence, conclusions and recommendations
on Hong Kong in 1998, 2000 and 2006.[1]
Terms of reference and evidence
gathered
2. We launched our inquiry with broad terms of reference
covering many aspects of UK-Hong Kong relations, specifically
seeking evidence on:
· The
FCO's monitoring of the implementation of the Joint Declaration
and Basic Law, including its six-monthly reports to Parliament;
· The UK Government's
relationship with the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
(SAR) Government;
· The UK's position
on progress on political and constitutional reform in Hong Kong
as it moves toward universal suffrage, taking note of the wider
context of social and economic development in Hong Kong;
· The UK's presence
and its ongoing interests in Hong Kong, including the prospects
for trade, business and cultural exchange; and
· The work of
the British Council in Hong Kong.
3. Over the course of the inquiry, the Committee
held six public, formal evidence sessions in Westminster, as well
as several informal meetings relevant to the inquiry. We also
held three oral evidence sessions with interlocutors in Hong Kong
via video-conference. In total, we took oral evidence from 20
people, in addition to the Minister of State and FCO officials.
We also received more than 750 submissions of written evidence
over the course of the inquiry, a large proportion of which were
petitions sent by people in Hong Kong. We are grateful to all
those in the UK and Hong Kong who took the time to provide written
and oral evidence.
China's ban on the Committee's
visit
4. We intended to visit Hong Kong in December 2014,
to meet with senior officials in the Hong Kong SAR government,
legislators, British business leaders, journalists, academics
and representatives of civil society, amongst others. Immediately
after we announced the launch of our inquiry, the Chinese Ambassador
to the UK, the Chinese National People's Congress and the Hong
Kong Economic and Trade Office wrote to inform us that they considered
the inquiry to constitute interference in China's internal affairs,
urging us to halt the inquiry and to cancel our planned visit.[2]
We replied that we considered the inquiry to be well within our
remit to scrutinise the work of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
as part of the UK Government. We also said that we intended to
continue with our inquiry and to carry out our visit to Hong Kong
as scheduled. However, on 28 November, the Chinese Deputy Ambassador
to the UK informed us that we would be stopped if we attempted
to travel to Hong Kong, even though as UK nationals we did not
need visas to enter the Special Administrative Region.
5. On 2 December the House of Commons held an Emergency
Debate on China's ban on our visit. Those who took part were unanimous
in expressing concern about the ban. In his response to the debate
and in a subsequent letter, FCO Minister of State the Rt Hon Hugo
Swire set out how the Government responded to the ban. In our
view, this response did not go far enough. We therefore published
a short Report on 10 December recommending that the FCO take further
action, including summoning the Chinese Ambassador.[3]
6. The Minister told us that he had made clear to
the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities at the highest levels that
the UK Government believed China's decision to deny us entry to
Hong Kong had been "regrettable, mistaken, counterproductive,
wholly unjustified and ultimately not in the spirit of the Sino-British
Joint Declaration."[4]
The Foreign Secretary repeated this phrasing in his foreword to
the six-monthly report on Hong Kong covering July to December
2014.[5] The report also
concluded that it was "perfectly reasonable" for the
Committee to visit Hong Kong in seeking to hold the UK Government
to account, and reiterated that the Government had "repeatedly"
made clear "both publicly and privately" that the prevention
of our visit was "wholly unjustified, counter-productive
and contrary to the spirit of the Joint Declaration.[6]
The Minister of State told us, however, that officially summoning
the Chinese Ambassador "would not have served any particular
purpose."[7] We disagree,
especially in light of reports that the Minister himself was denied
meetings with government officials when he visited Hong Kong on
8 January 2015, a day after the Hong Kong government launched
a second round of public consultation on constitutional reform.[8]
The Minister said in response to a Parliamentary Question that
Hong Kong government officials were unable to meet with him as
they were "focused on the launch" of the consultation
round.[9] News reports,
however, said that UK diplomats were "fuming", quoting
one source as saying that for a minister of this rank to be denied
any meetings was "unheard of".[10]
This is a cause for serious concern.
7. While we welcome the Minister of State's assurances
that the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities are aware that the
UK Government disapproves of their decision to deny us entry to
Hong Kong, we remain profoundly disappointed with the FCO's response
to this unprecedented act. Recent actions by the Chinese and Hong
Kong governments toward UK MPs have been wholly contrary to the
spirit of the Joint Declaration, and fuel concern about Hong Kong's
direction of travel. The Chinese government's behaviour towards
the UK on this issue also raises wider concerns about the state
of UK-China relations and has naturally had an impact on how we
have conducted this inquiry.
Main themes of the report
8. There were several significant political developments
in Hong Kong in the latter half of 2014, including the publication
of a Chinese State Council White Paper on "one country, two
systems", the 31 August decision on electoral reform by the
Standing Committee of the Chinese National People's Congress,
and the major protest campaign against that decision which lasted
from September to December. These events brought political and
constitutional issues to the forefront of the inquiry. The vast
majority of written submissions we received focused on these matters
and the UK Government's response to recent developments in Hong
Kong. This narrowing of the inquiry's focus was exacerbated by
the Chinese government's decision to prevent our visit, after
which Hong Kong government officials declined invitations to speak
to us via video-conference about broader aspects of UK-Hong Kong
bilateral relations. We consider, however, that the original terms
of reference announced in July remain a useful framework through
which to evaluate the FCO's handling of the major aspects of UK-Hong
Kong relations.
9. Four main themes emerged from the evidence we
received and thus form the main aspects of this report:
· The
strength of business and trade ties between the UK and Hong Kong;
· The strengths
and weaknesses of the FCO's monitoring of the Joint Declaration
via its six-monthly reports on Hong Kong;
· Recent political
and constitutional developments relating to the potential introduction
of universal suffrage for the 2017 Chief Executive election, and
the FCO's response to those events;
· The perceived
erosion of Hong Kong's rights, freedoms and overall autonomy,
and the FCO's reporting on these issues.
·
1 Foreign Affairs Committee, Third Report of Session
1997-98, Hong Kong, HC 710; Foreign Affairs Committee, Tenth Report
of Session 1999-2000, China, HC 574-I; Foreign Affairs Committee,
Seventh Report of Session 2005-06, East Asia, HC 860-I Back
2
Letter to the Chairman from Liu Xiaoming, Ambassador of the People's Republic of China,
14 July 2014; Letter to the Chairman from Erica Ng, Director-General, Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office, London,
14 July 2014; Letter to the Committee from the Foreign Affairs Committee, the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China,
28 July 2014 Back
3
Foreign Affairs Committee, Seventh Report of Session 2014-15,
Hong Kong: China's ban on the Committee's visit, HC 842 Back
4
Q315 Back
5
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Six-Monthly Report on Hong Kong: 1 July to 31 December 2014,
February 2015, p 3 Back
6
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, The Six-Monthly Report on Hong Kong: 1 July to 31 December 2014,
February 2015, p 24 Back
7
Q315 Back
8
Bryan Harris and Danny Lee, "British diplomats fuming over Hong Kong's snub of Hugo Swire",
South China Morning Post, 25 January 2015 Back
9
HC Deb, 29 January 2015, Written Question no. 222047 Back
10
Tom Phillips, "Hong Kong snub leaves British diplomats 'fuming'",
The Telegraph, 25 January 2015 Back
| 
