Lord Davidson is a Labour party front-bencher in the House of Lords, the UK’s upper house
By John Sudworth
BBC News, Shanghai
Given that the UK Labour Party says that it is “deeply concerned” about the human rights situation in Tibet, it might seem odd that one of its senior politicians is in Lhasa at all.
The Fourth Forum on the Development of Tibet, taking place in the Tibetan capital this week, is a Communist Party-run symposium and therefore an unavoidably political affair.
But Lord Davidson of Glen Clova, a Labour party front-bencher in the House of Lords, is not only in attendance but happy it seems to sing the praises of Beijing’s economic policies.
“It’s very clear that the investment that has been put into Tibet has raised the standards of living of people here quite remarkably,” he is seen on camera telling a journalist from Chinese state-run media.
“I was hearing about the doubling, more or less, of the longevity of the population,” he goes on.
“These are remarkable accomplishments achieved in a very short time.”
The Free Tibet group say Chinese migration into Tibet has marginalised Tibetans
His comments have been met by astonishment by Free Tibet, a UK-based group that campaigns for an end to what it calls China’s occupation of Tibet.
“If the reports are accurate,” it said in a statement, “Lord Davidson should have acquainted himself with the facts before regurgitating China’s propaganda on Tibet.”
“Economic development in Tibet is far from what it seems from the window of a car or a plush meeting room in Lhasa.”
The group’s lengthy statement goes on to make the case that mass Chinese immigration has, rather than being beneficial to the population, shut Tibetans out of their own economy, leading for example, to high rates of child malnutrition.
The BBC has been unable – either through the Labour Party or through Lord Davidson’s legal practice in Scotland – to contact him to seek a clarification of his comments.
A Labour Party spokesman said he did not think the Shadow Advocate General for Scotland was at the Lhasa conference in an official Labour Party capacity, although at the time of writing he too had been unable to reach him.