| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The Earl of Lauderdale: My Lords, how is that done? Is there a formal declaration?
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, as I said, there is no formal ceremony, but there is an acknowledgement by countries when they become members of the Commonwealth. The situation described by my noble friend Lady Park of Monmouth about Africa in the Commonwealth is very important. The Commonwealth has probably meant more to African countries in their development than it has done to many others. I am very conscious of the responsibility that I carry for Africa within the Commonwealth.
I was grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Torrington, for his kind remarks. I shall not take up his tempting invitation, but perhaps I may advise him that having worked on Africa for more than 11 years trying to open up economic opportunities, to combat corruption and to get people on the right path, whatever happens to me in a few months' time I am not giving up on Africa. That may comfort a few people who think that they are going to see the back of me; they are not.
I was asked by the noble Lord, Lord Thurlow, about the budget for the Heads of Government meeting. There is an adequate budget for the conference and we shall ensure that the conference does both Britain and the Commonwealth proud. The noble Viscount, Lord Waverley, also asked about resources. I advise him that we pay very real tribute to the vital contribution which Chief Anyaoku and the secretariat make. The Commonwealth as a whole has agreed on zero real growth. The UK pays 30 per cent. of the costs. We do so willingly. We believe that we are getting value for money, but that is always something that one continues to watch. Sadly, many Commonwealth members are in arrears. That is one of the problems that the Commonwealth Secretariat and the Heads of Government meeting must tackle.
There will be a seminar on democracy in Africa shortly in Botswana, encouraging all countries to put into practice that to which they signed up in the Harare Declaration. That is where we can press hard on those who are falling behind in their respect for human rights and the rule of law.
I am conscious that I should not take too much time in this debate, but I must express to all those involved with us in the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, in the work set upon us from the Auckland meeting, how grateful we are for the support of the Commonwealth Secretariat, and particularly for that of the Deputy Secretary-General, Mr. K. Srinivasan, who has been a real stalwart in what has been a very difficult task. It is easy to pull the Commonwealth Ministerial
Action Group apart. It is much harder to build on the Harare Declaration the sort of future which all eight members seek.We are proud to be involved in the Commonwealth. I pick up the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Moore of Wolvercote, about the absence of the word "Commonwealth". For many years I have tried to go through every document produced by the Foreign Office to make sure not only that the word "Commonwealth" is there but that it is there with a meaning and with back-up. Obviously, I fell down on the job in the recent report--probably because of endless travel.
However, not only do we have an excellent and dedicated department for dealing with Commonwealth co-ordination, which has been significantly reinforced for the Heads of Government meeting, but, also, bilateral relations with Commonwealth countries occupy a very large proportion of the time of all of the staff of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Now, with the renegotiation of Lome, many more people who are attributed to the European Union department, are working on Commonwealth situations. There is no way in which the Commonwealth is forgotten. Perhaps we should have a spell check so that as soon as "Foreign" is printed, the word "Commonwealth" has to follow it. At least the Foreign Secretary, in his reply to the excellent report of the Select Committee on Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, gave the undertaking that we would re-examine what happened. We are currently considering how we can reflect our existing and on-going commitment to the Commonwealth in our 1997 departmental report.
I could say much more about this marvellous organisation, the Commonwealth. This year is a very special year. I pay my tribute also to Her Majesty the Queen. Not only has she given 40 years' tireless service to the Commonwealth and, more, to its people, but she will take a very full part in this year's Heads of Government meeting which comes just after the 50th anniversary of her wedding. Her Majesty has been absolutely indefatigable. Whenever I meet present and past Commonwealth leaders, I am reminded of their deep affection for Her Majesty and for the tremendous example she sets to everyone else. If we could all emulate even a tiny part of what Her Majesty has done for the Commonwealth, we would be able to achieve even more than we have so far.
I am delighted that the Royal Commonwealth Society has declared 1997 the UK Year of the Commonwealth. I am sure that the whole House joins me in endorsing that initiative. The Foreign Secretary will launch the year tomorrow. Sadly, I am not able to be present, but I shall certainly be there in spirit.
Britain's role in the Commonwealth will not diminish once the Year of the Commonwealth is over. We look forward to taking a continuing full role in future Commonwealth activities. In particular, we look forward to taking part in the Commonwealth Games in Kuala Lumpur in 1998 and to welcoming Commonwealth athletes to the Commonwealth Games in Manchester in 2002. In the meantime, we have much to do and the Commonwealth Heads of Government
meeting in October in Edinburgh will be a very important milestone in the unique venture of international co-operation which the Commonwealth represents. It is worthwhile. It is good news for all its members, and we have to make it even better for those who have not yet lived up to the Harare Declaration.7.56 p.m.
Viscount Waverley: My Lords, it remains for me to thank all speakers who have taken part in the debate. I take the upbeat messages contained in all contributions as an endorsement of the Commonwealth approach. I had prepared a few short remarks on all speakers' contributions, but given the late hour I hope that I may be forgiven for addressing just one point.
I was distressed to hear the remarks of the noble Lords, Lord Astor and Lord Rea, but I consoled myself that identifying problem areas is what in large part the Commonwealth is all about. I have just returned from Cameroon and had the opportunity to call on a number of Ministers--
The Deputy Speaker (Lord Lyell): My Lords, the time allotted for this debate has now elapsed. Does the noble Viscount wish to withdraw his Motion?
Viscount Waverley: My Lords, may I appeal to the House to take up one more minute of its time? I believe that I have five minutes in which to wind up. With the permission of the House, may I have one more minute? Any objections?
Lord Chesham: My Lords, perhaps I may advise the noble Viscount that the time allowed for this debate is two-and-a-half hours. It is not a question of time being allocated for wind-ups. The two-and-a-half hours have now expired.
Viscount Waverley: My Lords, then perhaps I may reiterate my remarks and thank everyone for coming. My Lords, I beg leave to withdraw my Motion for Papers.
Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.
British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill [H.L.]
7.57 p.m.
Clause 1 [Acquisition of British citizenship]:
Lord Willoughby de Broke moved the amendment:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this simple amendment to Clause 1 tightens the effects of the Bill. It seeks to make it impossible for anyone who will be encompassed by the Bill to renounce any other
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Blatch): My Lords, if the Government were supporting my noble friend's Bill then we would be happy to support this amendment. That said, the amendment does represent an improvement to the Bill because it would ensure that people did not abuse the legislation by deliberately putting themselves in a position to benefit from it. I shall not be opposing the amendment.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
An amendment (privilege) made.
Lord Willoughby de Broke: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.
At this stage of the Bill I do not propose to enter into a detailed debate about the flaws in the position of the Government. However, there is one point that is worth mentioning. If the resistance to this Bill is an issue of immigration, which I believe it is, surely the Government must revoke their current policy, which means that inevitably these people will come to this country. The Government should therefore support the Bill, which would have the effect of giving that community in Hong Kong the security and status that it needs to stay there. The basis on which the Government introduced the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990 was precisely to anchor people in Hong Kong. This Bill will have exactly the same effect. It is indeed an anti-immigration Bill.
If the Government believe that life will be roses all the way for this community, why have they introduced a separate policy towards them? The position of the Government is logically incoherent. Either these people have a problem or they do not. The Government have recognised that they have a problem. Surely, they must come up with something more convincing than the current half-baked asylum policy that is now on offer.
The cause of this Bill is supported by people with a deep knowledge of Hong Kong: two most distinguished former Governors of Hong Kong; the present Governor; the Hong Kong Legislative Council; my noble friend Lord Glenarthur, who is unable to be here this evening but who had ministerial responsibility for Hong Kong; and all parties in this House and in another place. Yet the Government do nothing but repeat woodenly the same discredited arguments.
The position of the Government reminds me of the story--I promise that I will deal with it briefly--of the proud parents who went to see their son at a passing out parade at his military academy. All the cadets marched past beautifully to the sound of a military band. The mother nudged the father and said, "Look, Dad, everybody's out of step except our Johnnie". The Government are out of step with what needs to be done--and, above all, what can be done so easily.
I understand that the Government of China would have no objection to what is proposed in the Bill. We do not have to seek permission from our partners in
Moved, That the Bill do now pass.--(Lord Willoughby de Broke.)
Page 1, line 11, at end insert ("and (c) who has not after 21st November 1996 renounced or otherwise ceased of his own volition to hold the status of a national or citizen of another country.").
7.59 p.m.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page