Chris Patten and other talking heads should examine UK visitor controls before criticising Hong Kong’s
Grenville Cross says the UK has barred numerous individuals from entry for political reasons, yet British politicians prefer to obsess about Hong Kong’s immigration system, following the decision to deny entry to activist Benedict Rogers, rather than ensure their own house is in order
British lawmakers to quiz Theresa May’s government over human rights campaigner being barred from Hong Kong
Rogers insisted he was coming to Hong Kong for a private visit, but this was clearly not a sightseeing holiday. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying said Rogers “must have been very clear as to whether he intended to interfere with the affairs of a special administrative region and the independence of Hong Kong’s judiciary”. Beijing presumably did not want to admit an activist who might cause tensions at a sensitive time.

Greater transparency would ease concerns
UK Home Office rules indicate that visitors may be denied entry if they were previously imprisoned. Through guidelines adopted in 2015, while Theresa May was still home secretary, they may also be barred if their presence is not considered “conducive to public good because of their conduct, convictions, character, associations or other reasons”. These generalised criteria leave people at the mercy of the Home Office. May also revealed that hundreds had been barred for “hate speech”.
