Registered user login:

A shared sense of citizenship

Peter Goldsmith

Published 26 November 2007

Lord Goldsmith writes for newstatesman.com on his review of UK citizenship and his belief that diversity needs to combine with a shared sense of belonging

We have in this country taken citizenship for granted. We call people citizens and we offer citizenship to people who have moved here from other places, sometimes escaping persecution - but we take it for granted that everyone will figure out what citizenship means. This is why I am currently doing a review of citizenship and I see this review as an opportunity to articulate a clearer sense of British citizenship.

Over recent weeks, I have begun to meet new citizens and people on the route to citizenship and many of them articulate the meaning of citizenship for themselves as a source of dignity and protection, as well as a responsibility. One or two have even asked me why it is that some people, who were born citizens of the UK, don’t share that civic identity or bother to vote. A study published last month by Refugee Support showed that the overwhelming majority of refugees, who have become citizens and acquired the right to vote, use it, and do more besides, like join political parties and engage in volunteering.

By contrast, there is a rising tide of disaffection in parts of our communities – of which the most acute example is the existence of support or sympathy for terrorist attacks here in Britain. This suggests that the sense of belonging which citizenship might be thought to stand for does not exist throughout all of those people who are born citizens, let alone those who come to it.

Historically, we could rely on a shared history. Even most people who moved to the UK came from countries where culture and society had been shaped either by the English language or by British rule. But migrants to the UK now come from a much wider range of countries – including places in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and French-speaking Africa. Though we have been a union of four nations for a long time, there are now as many as three hundred languages spoken in London.

I cherish this diversity and I am proud that Britain, on the whole, is a welcoming place. However, we do need to ensure that this diversity goes hand in hand with a shared sense of belonging. We need that shared sense if we want to have good relations between different communities; common security; and other common projects like an immigration policy that will meet the needs of Britain’s economy, as well as provide refuge to those who need it, and public services that are for everyone, no matter how different they are from one another.

Of course, many people use Britishness to imply something else. For them, Britain is an exclusive idea, defined by an ethnic identity. I don’t see it that way. When asked what values or characteristics they associate with Britain, most people pick civic values like tolerance or respect for the law.

According to a recent survey, 91% of people of Bangladeshi origin feel strongly that they belong in Britain. This evidence suggests that Britishness is an inclusive and forward-looking idea. If that’s right, then we should use it confidently to foster a shared sense of belonging.

The question of how to achieve this is a very practical one. As part of my Review, I am publishing monthly pamphlets. The latest pamphlet, available on the review website, is written by Time Bank which runs a very successful mentoring programme for refugees, using volunteers.

Britain has a long and proud tradition of volunteering and it is estimated that the economic value of volunteering is £39 billion a year. The great benefit of the mentoring scheme is that it provides refugees with a greater sense of confidence and a better understanding of British culture. As one mentee put it, her mentor had helped her to “understand what it means in Britain when one says, ‘Let’s meet at one o’clock’. It’s one o clock. It’s not five past one.”

On the other side of the relationship, I am impressed by how many people are willing to make the regular and extensive commitment that mentoring requires. When asked why they do it, many mentors explain that they want to show that Britain is a welcoming country. Hence their sense of being British is not discriminatory or aggressive, quite the opposite, it motivates them to be helpful to people who have just moved here seeking our protection.

The aim of my Review therefore is to look at the route to citizenship for new migrants and at other practical ways in which it is possible to build a sense of shared belonging. Regressive and conservative elements in our society have had exclusive use of the notion of Britishness for long enough; it is time that the tolerant majority took it back.

Lord Goldsmith QC's Citizenship Review will report to the prime minister at the end of March, 2008

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers

Derek Bennett
28 November 2007 at 10:36

What chance has Lord Goldsmith of getting this right when he can’t even refer to us in the correct manner? We are not “citizens”, we live in a Monarchy and as such are British subjects, of which I am extremely proud to be.

Sadly, the John Major government, when it ratified the Treaty of Maastricht, inferred upon us all, without consultation or the opportunity to reject it, European citizenship. I have personally renounced this citizenship by writing to Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary. There is no need for anyone to tinker with our status as British subjects, when Queen Elizabeth II swore her coronation oath she swore to protect her subjects – what more do we need, other than for those who wish to live here and become British subjects to respect this and our wonderful history which gave us this privilege.

Anyone wishing to also renounce EU citizenship can sign my petition at: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Optout/

IrritatedofTonbridge
28 November 2007 at 11:12

To infer means to deduce, doesn't it? Do you mean confer? Incidentally John Major didn't know what infer meant either - he thought it meant to imply.

Anne Palmer
29 November 2007 at 16:45

Britain is made up of people from all different corners of the earth going right back to Saxon time, the Vikings etc. Children used to be taught about citizenship at school, Magna Carta the our Bill of Rights about our Kings and Queens, not any more for they are more likely to be taught about EU Citizenship.

It was at Maastricht that we were made European Citizens. Allegedly added to, and not replacing British citizenship. We were not asked if we wanted to have European Citizenship thrust upon us. Neither, I rather suspect, was the Queen asked because John Major, gleefully told Parliament, "even the Queen is a European Citizen now”. I have often wondered how is it possible to be a Queen of one Country and yet simply a "citizen" of another. It was a very demeaning episode for the Queen.

A once respected Prime Minister of Great Britain to admit and apparently be proud to demean the British Crown at that time to which there is indeed a much under used law against such a matter. I along with many other people have renounced my European citizenship, that is if it is possible to renounce a ‘concept’ of citizenship. (a concept- [an idea or invention to ‘sell’ or publicize a new commodity] ) This I did when I realised a new Bill ((Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002) was going through Parliament at the time this Government was trying to give itself the power, for the very first time in the history of this Country, to remove the British citizenship of a person that was actually born here in the United Kingdom.

International law prefers only one Nationality and when a person has voluntarily taken on a further nationality, it prefers to remove the former nationality. I did not want to be left with just EU nationality so I thought I would renounce the EU nationality that had been thrust upon me. I believe I was the first person to do this. According to International law, no one can be made “Stateless” by removing citizenship, and I had had visions of having my British citizenship removed, leaving me only as a European Citizen against my wishes.

The EU Reform treaty if ratified, will be given Legal personality, the UK by transferring the Royal Prerogative powers of Treaty Making to the EU. Yes, that is what it means. It will also be a self amending Treaty and when we think of all that is in the Reform Treaty which many MP's call "an Amending Treaty" it will give us ALL an idea what power the EU will have.. Many people in this Country might wonder why we bother to vote, or even pay our MP's for, for our new Government will reside in Brussels.

We are told not to worry, it is only “additional to”, an “add on”, a bonus” not “in place of”, so WHAT is the point of it? Accept the EU Reform Treaty and then ask where will our oaths of allegiance lie? Will it be in conflict with our oath to the Queen? Perhaps we should change our loyal oath and then it will not be in conflict? That change to our oath is happening now (SOCA and police) yet these changes are contrary to our Constitution. According to R v Thistlewood 1820, to destroy the Constitution is “an act of treason”. If that action is an act of treason-repeal the Treason Acts then? This has happened already. (1998) I would like you to think about this puzzle. What if the European Court of Justice decided that the Oath of Allegiance to our Queen was superseded by a superior allegiance owed to a different political organisation such as the European Union? It is quite clear that the EU wants Government Ministers to put the EU high on their list. Certainly Judges have to look too the EU Treaties first, before their Oath? The Treaty our PM will probably sign in December will be agreeing that it is superior even to our highest Court, and cabinet, proving eventually that the European Union citizenship we thought was additional to, is now superior to our British citizenship? What then? Can any Government of this Country afford to take a chance? Is it not being the tiniest bit reckless with our country?

What is the purpose of citizenship of the EU? We can read that “Citizens shall be subject to the duties imposed” but nowhere are those duties made clear. Only a fool signs a contract without knowing what their “duties” are. What if it is a ‘duty’ to pay taxes? To eventually have our youth “conscripted” into a Euro Army? The government's duty through a n eU Regulation to transfer our territorial Waters to the EU? To transfer sovereignty over our National Security to the EU? This was brought home to us very recently over our involvement in Iraq, when other countries, quite correctly used their own authority to keep out of it. In an EU State, we would have to do as we are told. If a European State decides that its forces are to go into Iraq, we would have to conform because our EU citizenship will eventually place a duty and an obligation on us to abide by their orders.

Union Citizenship cannot be acquired alone, nor can it be forfeited without giving up nationality. EU Citizenship becomes a nightmare. It becomes like Ivy that clings to another living plant until eventually it strangles the life out of that that gave it life in the first place.

Finally, before ANY further EU Treaty is signed and ratified, I remind ALL that their solemn Oath of Allegiance is to the Queen (Crown) and this Country, it will also the follow that the very first Treaty of Rome should never have been signed or ratified. A further wrong does not make the first "right". This is only touching the surface but enough for now I think.

scaredman1
06 March 2008 at 00:17

Can someone please let me know when will this Citizenship bill become law? Most Asians believe that its going to be a racist law like those before it and that it will come into force in April 2008. But I have not read the draft so I cannot tell how damaging the bill will be when it becomes law; but I am scared!

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Should the international community intervene in Gaza?