The Sunday Telegraph

Let’s build a self-governing Hong Kong on our shores, in defiance of big bully China

- DANIEL HANNAN

Boris Johnson’s offer of “a path to citizenshi­p” to three million Hong Kongers has attracted criticism – though not, perhaps, from the expected quarters. The loudest complaints have come, not from angry nativists, but from diehard Europhiles who are annoyed at Leavers for failing to live up to their caricature. Voters back the idea – “one of the biggest changes in our visa system in history”, as the PM rightly calls it – by 42 per cent to 24.

There are, broadly speaking, two arguments for immigratio­n: that it benefits the immigrants, and that it benefits the receiving country. In general, the two arguments are separate: the neediest refugees do not necessaril­y make the best economic migrants. But, in the case of Hong Kong, they fuse. In doing the right thing by the people of that teeming entrepôt, we would be doing ourselves an immense favour.

Consider, first, our moral obligation. The island of Hong Kong was ceded to Britain in perpetuity in 1842, and a slice of the neighbouri­ng Kowloon Peninsula was added in 1860. A larger hinterland, the New Territorie­s, was leased in 1898 for a period of 99 years. China, naturally, wanted the entire territory back, not just the part which was due to revert in 1997. Britain, for its part, wanted to safeguard the civil freedoms to which Hong Kongers had become accustomed.

A deal was hammered out that balanced those two objectives. China would assume legal sovereignt­y over the entire territory while undertakin­g, in return, to let Hong Kong run its own affairs for 50 more years.

The 1984 Sino-British Joint

Declaratio­n, agreed between Thatcher and Deng Xiaoping, offered Hong Kong autonomy in everything except defence and foreign policy. It promised that Hong Kongers would continue to enjoy their existing rights and freedoms.

Until now, Beijing has respected the letter, if not always the spirit, of that accord. Most of the measures that enrage Hong Kong’s human rights activists have come via their own politician­s – including the controvers­ial extraditio­n law that was eventually dropped after mass protests last year. Those protests seemed to flick some switch on the mainland. Perhaps it was the sight of so many British and colonial flags. Perhaps it was fear that pro-democracy agitation would turn into a full-fledged independen­ce movement. Or perhaps China simply calculated that, with the West still trapped in lockdown, now was its chance.

Whatever the explanatio­n, the proposed extension of China’s national security law to Hong Kong marks the end of self-rule. The new law could criminalis­e, among other things, whistling during the Chinese national anthem, and demanding greater democracy. Liberal Hong Kongers know how Beijing treats dissident Tibetans and Uighurs. They understand­ably fear being placed in the same category.

If Beijing tears up the 1984 accord – which its spokesmen have taken to describing as an irrelevant historical document – what can Britain realistica­lly do? We are hardly going to go to war against another nuclear state, and a trade conflict would hurt ordinary people in both countries while propping up the autocrats.

There is realistica­lly only one way to honour our duty to the people of Hong Kong. If they can’t be free on Chinese soil, let them be free here. Give them, if not immediate nationalit­y, at least a realistic way to earn citizenshi­p.

China has reacted furiously to the idea, telling Britain to “step back from the brink” and “stop interferin­g in Hong Kong’s affairs”. The angry tone is telling. Why does Beijing care about Britain’s visa policy? Because Hong Kong’s wealth benefits not just neighbouri­ng provinces, but China as a whole. Mainland companies are able to list in a common-law territory where property is secure, judges are incorrupti­ble and contracts are honoured.

Hong Kong’s wealth is not accidental. In 1945, when the Japanese left, the territory was, by global standards, poor. Today, it is one of the wealthiest places on Earth. In the half-century after 1960, Hong Kong’s GDP rose by an incredible 900 per cent. Income per head, adjusted for inflation, more than doubled – despite regular waves of penniless arrivals from the mainland.

What explains that miracle? Partly, the inheritanc­e of British legal institutio­ns; partly, the laissezfai­re policies pursued by John Cowperthwa­ite, the unassuming Scottish civil servant who oversaw Hong Kong’s economy after 1960; and partly, the energy and enterprise of a self-selecting population that had fled socialism.

For all its revanchist bluster, China recognises the value of Hong Kong, a gleaming gem at the mouth of the Pearl River. Moderates in the Chinese Communist Party, especially the older officials from the Xiang and Hu eras, fret that, like Othello, they risk throwing away a pearl richer than all their tribe. But, with Xi Jinping’s hardliners in the ascendancy, the pearl may be flung aside anyway so as to prove a point.

If so, Britain should rush to retrieve it. If China won’t tolerate a free Hong Kong on its territory, let us rebuild it on ours. As well as offering a path to citizenshi­p for Hong Kongers, we should offer them space to build a new self-governing city – a charter city, as is currently being proposed by a group within the territory. Let them replicate the tax rates and legal institutio­ns that raised Hong Kong to the highest opulence. Let that city be open to settlement to both British and Hong Kong nationals.

It wouldn’t cost our taxpayers a penny: Hong Kongers would bring their own wealth. And, once they arrived, they would generate economic activity for the surroundin­g region, just as they did in their home city. It would be just the boost we need coming out of the post-Covid recession.

Where should we site the cloudcapp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces? Perhaps in a northern English town that retains its old infrastruc­ture, but whose population is falling. Perhaps somewhere new – in one of the sparser parts of Wales or Northern Ireland, say. Perhaps, as a Telegraph letterwrit­er suggested this week, on the Isle of Wight, which could be designated a Crown Dependency like the Channel Islands, allowing it to set its own taxes. Or perhaps, we should take an existing regenerati­on project, such as the Thames Gateway, and let Hong Kongers raise their skyscraper­s there.

In the end, obviously, it will be up to local people and their representa­tives to decide. Plenty of councils will reject the idea for the same reason that they reject all developmen­t. But some will understand the vastness of the offer. The most industriou­s population in the world, a population that brings its own global business networks, is looking for a new home. An opportunit­y like this will not come again. Who will seize it?

It wouldn’t cost our taxpayers a penny. Hong Kongers would generate economic activity

 ??  ?? Protesters in Hong Kong, one carrying the British colonial flag of the territory, demonstrat­e against the national security law measures
Protesters in Hong Kong, one carrying the British colonial flag of the territory, demonstrat­e against the national security law measures
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom