Citizenship Review
From Democracywiki
Central Lobby
 Our View Unlock Democracy has criticised Lord Goldsmith’s citizenship review for its narrow view of what it means to be a UK citizen and in particular for being antithetical to the UK’s rich history. Unlock Democracy’s main objections are as follows
|
Lord Goldsmith has been appointed to conduct an independent review of Citizenship in the UK and specifically to explore the proposals outlined on the Governance of Britain Green Paper . Launching the review Lord Goldsmith said
"Calling a person a citizen is an important step. We accept people into our national community when we make them citizens. And, by seeking citizenship, a person expresses their desire to be a member of our community. Yet we take citizenship for granted in this country, especially when people are born with it.
"This review is an opportunity to address that. Over the next few months, I am hoping to articulate more clearly the significance of citizenship, and develop recommendations to ensure that our approach to citizenship is appropriate for modern issues of migration, identity and civic participation."
Report Published
Lord Goldsmith’s report Citizenship: Our Common Bond was published in March 2008. The report covers in detail current and historic definitions and attributes of citizenship in the UK, and other allied states giving rise to rights or benefits from the state. It also makes recommendations on how legal and social aspects of citizenship should be changed. It notes that
“if citizenship should be seen as the package of rights and responsibilities which demonstrate the tie between a person and a country, the present scheme falls short of that ideal” (p. 6).
Unlock Democracy has a particular interest in political participation and the characterisation of citizenship.
Key recommendations include:
- The removal of the right to vote of any non-citizen (excluding EU citizens in the UK and Irish citizens who have citizenship connected to Northern Ireland) is proposed.
This is of concern as it would decrease political involvement by any other group including those who have historically been able to be politically engaged.
- that permanent residents should be expected to become citizens, and that those who cannot because their country of origin refuses to allow dual citizenship should become ‘associate citizens’
It is not clear what rights/responsibilities this category of citizens would have. This is
“a move towards abolishing the status of permanent resident and making a clear distinction between non-citizens and citizens. This includes providing people who are committed to settling in the UK – and have the right to do so – with a compelling route to citizenship” (p. 77).
We feel this disregards the contribution made by and the benefits of participation of those who make the UK their home for a long time, but who plan eventually to go back to their country of origin. Such a policy may be discriminatory, especially on the grounds of race, and given the clearly superior rights to political participation to be enjoyed by citizens under these proposals.
- Reform of the law of reason is proposed “to make the duty of allegiance relevant to modern conditions” (p. 7).
It is not clear exactly what this would involve, but would appear to have similar logic to some anti-terrorism legislation – i.e. that the motivating factor behind a criminal act, causing terror, makes that criminal act worse and so an additional offence is necessary. This gives rise to questions about why the criminal law alone is not felt to be sufficient to punish wrongdoers, and whether it is legitimate or helpful to create/extend in this modern context a law with a dubious past. The idea of sedition being actively prosecuted and punished is a concerning one.
- Among proposals for increasing citizenship awareness among young people is a proposal that citizenship ceremonies be extended to all young people, possibly when they leave school.
This carries serious potential for dividing society, with young people potentially feeling compelled to opt out of ceremonies in order not to pledge allegiance to things they don’t believe in or are not committed to (for example, the Queen). It further risks exclusion as there are young people who are in schools who are not British citizens and would not be allowed to participate, as well as those who are not attending school.
Overall the report focuses overwhelmingly on the idea of young people becoming good citizens through volunteering and other civic activities, and very little on voting or active democratic participation. This is of great concern to Unlock Democracy given the extremely low voting turnout of younger people. The proposals for deliberation days and petitions are welcome but do not go far enough to challenge the crisis in political engagement. This tying of social activities and involvement to the legal status of citizenship is inherently problematic – those who are not citizens should be equally encouraged and supported to participate politically and socially.
- Regarding inclusion of new migrants, Lord Goldsmith recommends promotion of English language lessons. This is to be welcomed especially as it contradicts the recent government policy of cutting funding for teaching of English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL). It is also proposed that further consideration be given to “issues that may inhibit the integration of threatened migrants” (p. 9).
Lord Goldsmith calls for a review of the rule that refugees are since 2005 granted five years to remain in the UK, and when this expires their case is reconsidered, rather than the previous unlimited leave to remain. He reports that “this change tends to ‘freeze’ the life of refugees who have come to the UK, as they do not know whether they will be permitted to stay. Hence there is a disincentive to train to work in the UK, to learn English or to integrate with UK society.
"I was told that this can be damaging not only for the individuals and their families but for UK society, as we fail to harness the talents and abilities of people who have come here as refugees” (p. 123).
Unlock Democracy supports this call.
It is also proposed that the cost of obtaining citizenship should increase over time to encourage earlier take-up. This discriminates against those on lower incomes and it is unclear why those who happen to take up citizenship later should be financially punished for doing so rather than welcomed.
Terms of reference
- To clarify the legal rights and responsibilities associated with British citizenship, in addition to those enjoyed under the Human Rights Act, as a basis for defining what it means to be a citizen in Britain's open democratic society
- To consider the difference between the different categories of British nationality
- To examine the relationship between residence, citizenship and British national status and the incentives for long-term residents to become British citizens
- To explore the role of citizens and residents in civic society, including voting, jury service and other forms of civic participation
The review was launched on 5 October 2007 and will report to the Prime Minister in March 2008.
Publications
The Review, is publishing a series of pamphlets, focussing on different aspects of the subject, written by leading experts and commentators. Topic include the future of the citizenship ceremonies and mentoring for new migrants. The pamphlets contain the views of the authors rather than those of Lord Goldsmith. The authors and topics will be chosen to stimulate debate.
PDF versions of the pamphlets are available here for free download.
