STATUTES
| Date | 01 September 1972 |
| Published date | 01 September 1972 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1972.tb02363.x |
STATUTES
IMMIGRATION
ACT
1971
THIS Act marks
a
very important stage in the process started in
1962
when statutory control was imposed upon the immigration of
Commonwealth citizens.
For
the broad purpose of the Act is to
assimilate by one permanent piece of legislation the legal position
of aliens and Commonwealth citizens for the purposes of immi-
gration and deportation, whilst preserving the rights of those
already in the United Kingdom. In
so
far as immigration policy
reflects a nation’s international relationships, the Act recognises that
Britain is no longer the metropolitan centre of the Commonwealth.
Immigration is now an essentially internal question to which the
citizenship of the immigrant is
of
declining importance.
It
is surely
no coincidence that the Act was passed less than
four
months before
the Government signed the Treaty of Accession to the European
Economic Communities. The Act will probably not be the final
stage in the process of shedding the vestiges of Empire, for
it
is
foreseeable that
a
new definition of United Kingdom citizenship will
be formulated which will determine both civic and immigration
rights.
The Act accomplishes its purpose
by
superimposing upon the
existing primary categories of persons for immigration purposes a
new distinction between persons who are patrial and those who are
not. Patrials are, in the main, those who are free
of
immigration
controls under existing legislation. Citizenship is certainly one of
the bases of the new status: but patriality is imperfectly congruent
with citizenship of the United Kingdom and Colonies in that some
such citizens do not enjoy it whilst some whose only citizenship is
of an independent Commonwealth country do. The reasons for the
Government’s reluc lance to bring forward a citizenship Act rather
than another Immigration Act appear to be, first, the problems
caused by the remaining colonies
;
secondly the protracted negotia-
tions with Commonwealth countries that would be necessary before
such a measure were introduced; and thirdly,
the
problem
of
citizens
of
the United Kingdom and Colonies who were brought
within the Commonwealth Immigrants Act
1968.
Although these
arguments are not without force the first could be dealt with by the
creation of a separate colonial citizenship
:
this solution is not,
however, available in relation to the Kenyan Asians, but a wrong
done in
1968
should be corrected.
It
is also difficult to see why such
a measure needed speedy implementation, for the new Act contains
no new provisions limiting the number of immigrants to this country.
Indeed, the most recent statements indicate that the Act will not
508
SEPT.
1972
STATUTES
509
be brought into operation until January
1973.
The Act does,
however, place upon a more permanent footing the separation of
status and immigration rights which has resulted from the
ad
hoc
legislation of the
1960s.
To what extent the Act will further endanger the already delicate
state of race relations
in
Britain is difficult to say. Fears of both
minority and majority have undoubtedly been fanned by the
apparently unplanned controls imposed by the earlier legislation.
Although the new Act is no more explicitly racially discriminatory
than its predecessors, one of its most significant provisions, the aboli-
tion of employment vouchers under which Commonwealth citizens
were admitted for settlement and without restrictions on their sub-
sequent employment, will have
a
greater impact on citizens of the
new Commonwealth countries than any other group.
It
is also true
that nationals of Members States of the EEC will enter on more
favourable terms than non-patrial Commonwealth citizens.' On the
other hand, the extension of the work permit system to all non-
patrials and the abolition of fixed quotas could add a degree of
flexibility by allowing in Commonwealth citizens for limited periods
in order to acquire and improve industrial skills and expertise. The
power in the Secretary of State to require non-patrials, irrespective
of citizenship, to register with the police
(s.
4
(3)
),
and the provision
in the Act for the administration
of
public funds to assist the volun-
tary repatriation of non-patrials
(s.
29),
have also aroused the
deepest suspicion amongst immigrant communities.
1.
The primary distinction drawn throughout the
Act is between patrials who have a right of abode in the United
Kingdom and are thus free from immigration control and non-
patrials who are not.2 Through the concept of patriality the Act
purports to distinguish between British subjects who
'(
belong
"
to
the United Kingdom and those who do not. Whilst the distinction
cuts across citizenship
of
the United Kingdom and Colonies and
citizenship of other Commonwealth countries, alien status and
patriality are mutually exclusive.
It
should be noted that the civic
rights enjoyed by British subjects resident in the United Kingdom
are unaffected by the Act and do not depend upon patriality. The
separation of legal status and legal rights will inevitably continue to
produce anomalies.
Immigration into
the
United Kingdom
(a)
Patrials.
Section
2
defines a patrial as:
(i) a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies
(a)
who
acquired that citizenship by birth, adoption, registration
or
naturali-
sation in the United Kingdom
or
Islands,"
or
(b)
who was born to
1
Arts.
48
and
49
of
the Treaty
of
Rome have been implemented by EEC
*
s.
1
(11,
2,,(6).
are
defined as the Channel Islands and the Isle
of
Man:
s.
1
(3).
Regulations 1612/68 and 1251/71 and by Directive 68/360.
I'
Islands
To continue reading
Request your trial