665
British Nationality Bill
r. Edward Lyons]
26 OCTOBER 1981
There is plenty to talk about. The amendments made in the Lords have wrought considerable changes to the Bill. The time allotted tomorrow is not adequate for discussion of those changes.
However, I cannot resist saying in passing, after hearing a recital of how long the Bill took going through the House of Commons, that the Government resisted changes proposed in the Commons which they now cheerfully accept from the Lords. While I am glad that they accept the changes made in the Lords, one wonders why, for example, referring to the Social Democrat amendment to prevent spouses from having to take a language test, which was argued fiercely in Committee and again on Report, the Government resisted that amendment by dividing the House, but here, happily, there comes back from the House of Lords a situation in which the language test is at last abolished and the Government accept that position. I feel that the Government are responsible for much of the extra time which discussion of the Bill involved, about which they complain.
As to the argument that if one is out of the country for 90 days one loses a right, their Lordships have managed to make an alteration, and the Government accept it. Again, I am glad that they have accepted it. One hears all the complaints about how long the Bill took in the Commons, but here we see the Government being the authors of their own misfortune.
In a Bill of Rights, there is an opportunity to enshrine rights for all our citizens, instead of leaving matters so much to discretions and permissions in the Home Office: I hope that we shall be able to enshrine in a Bill of Rights, rights for all our citizens that will be free from the suggestion of discrimination that the British Nationality Bill creates and maintains, particularly through the abolition of jus soli. For the first time those born in Britain will not necessarily be British. That means that many people in Britain-unfortunately, nearly all of coloured skin-will have to prove their citizenship from time to time. A birth certificate will not be enough. It is that fatal taint that makes the Bill unrespectable. As a result, the churches, and those involved in race relations, cannot begin to approve of it and the Bill will remain shameful.
Mr. John Page (Harrow, West) rose
Mr. Lyons: All this is being done because, a few children--probably less than 100 or 200 a year-are born in Britain to parents who are in transit or to parents who are over-stayers or illegal immigrants. For that, we must kill a principle that has served this country well for years. In my view and that of my party, that makes the Bill shabby. The Social Democratic Party will vote against the guillotine and the Bill. In its cardinal principle, the Bill is shameful.
10.56 pm
I
Mr. Tony Marlow (Northampton, North): congratulate my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and the Government on having brought the Bill to this stage. I should particularly like to congratulate my hon: Friend the Minister of State on handling this very human, complex issue with such skill and humanity. All of us, both in Committee and since, have been grateful to him for his courtesy.
340
M
(Allocation of Time)
666
After years of Empire and muddled citizenship we have a citizenship suitable for Britain in this part of the twentieth century. We have a new Bill that confers citizenship on those born of parents settled in this country or born abroad of parents who are manifestly British. No one can complain about that. It is a logical, sensible and reasonable thing to have done.
In the lead up to the last general election my right Friend the Prime Minister, in order to secure that so important aspect, better community relations, gave various undertakings to the country. The Bill is one of the main pillars of those undertakings. Its sole purpose is to define who is, and who is not, British and who has, and who does not have, the right to live and settle in the United Kingdom.
I know that it will be disputed, but it is basically common ground that for years we have had continuous immigration into the United Kingdom. That has unsettled the indigenous population. Many people have become fearful that areas in our cities will be colonised by outsiders-
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman should address the House on whether the order is good and should be supported.
Mr. Marlow: That is precisely the point that I was about to make. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's commitment is so important that the motion should be supported. By redefining citizenship in this way an important step has been taken towards reassuring the country that the problem that I referred to can no longer occur. Obviously, the next step is the commitment that my right hon. Friend gave to introduce a register and quota. That is a wise commitment, bearing in mind that since the Government came into power there has been an increase in the ethnic minorities of nearly 250,000. In addition to the Bill, the Government will be anxious to make a finite calculation of future numérical trends. No longer shall we look into a vague unknown that is haunted by extremists of both the Left and the Right.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I am unable to relate those arguments to the importance of this guillotine motion.
Mr. Marlow: I suggest that the Bill is part of the package put forward by my right hon. Friend to the British people. That is why it is so important that the Bill is passed, and it is therefore important that we wish it God speed and allow the Government to have their guillotine.
It is essential that we instil harmony into our citizens as a whole, so that we can respect and enjoy our different cultural backgrounds while imbuing all with a sense of British identity, culture and patriotism.
Mr. Stan Thorne: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Surely the hon. Member for Northampton, North(Mr. Marlow) has had an opportunity to read his Whip's suggestion to him that it was time that he terminated his speech. In view of your earlier comments, will the hon. Gentleman reach its conclusion?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Unfortunately, I could not read whatever note was passed to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Marlow: Perhaps I may continue. There has been one sad note in this whole episode, and it has been referred to already in this debate, It is the desire of Labour Members to sink to the lowest depths of vote grubbing by
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.