Modern Immigration Debates and Policy (1962–2010)

Why immigration became a political debate

Post-war Commonwealth migration connected Britain’s need for workers with its imperial relationships. Yet recruitment and legal rights did not guarantee acceptance. Some migrants encountered colour bars in employment and housing, while politicians debated whether Commonwealth citizens should continue to be able to enter Britain freely.

Arguments about housing shortages, employment and public services became intertwined with racism. Some officials treated non-white immigration as a threat to British society, rather than judging migrants as individuals. This made immigration a debate about national identity as well as numbers: who was regarded as British, and whose presence was considered acceptable?

Racism could also become organised political action. In Notting Hill in 1958, white attackers targeted black residents, their homes and property. Far-right organisations, including Oswald Mosley’s Union Movement and Colin Jordan’s White Defence League, helped incite hostility. Black residents resisted the attacks. These events brought racial violence and the treatment of migrants into wider public debate.

The Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1962

Harold Macmillan’s Conservative government argued that immigration needed controlling to maintain adequate housing and social conditions. The Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962 ended unrestricted entry for many Commonwealth citizens and introduced an employment-voucher system for entry for work.

The system distinguished between people with a job already arranged, people with recognised skills, and other applicants seeking work. It therefore made access to Britain depend increasingly on employment and qualifications rather than Commonwealth membership alone. It was a restriction, not a complete ban: some workers could still enter, and dependants could join them.

The law’s wording did not explicitly select migrants by race, but its effects were unequal. Patrick Gordon Walker, a Labour opponent of the legislation, argued that white migrants from countries such as Australia and Canada would more often qualify under the acceptable categories, while many non-white applicants would be excluded. Irish migration was not restricted in the same way. Sir Grantley Adams, Prime Minister of the Federation of the West Indies, also strongly opposed the measure.

Employment-based entry could magnify existing discrimination. If an employer refused to recruit black or Asian workers, those workers had less opportunity to obtain a job offer that would help them qualify for entry. A formally non-racial rule could therefore operate within an already unequal society.

Restrictions changed migration rather than stopping it

The 1962 Act did not end Commonwealth migration. Wives and children could join workers, so migration increasingly involved family settlement as well as individual workers arriving for employment. Some migrants hurried to bring relatives to Britain because they feared tighter restrictions in future.

Further restrictions followed. The number of employment vouchers was reduced in 1965, and another Commonwealth Immigrants Act followed in 1968. Immigration controls could make family migration more difficult and leave migrants feeling that their presence was unwanted.

This was an important change in Britain’s relationship with the Commonwealth. Connections that had helped people migrate after the war no longer guaranteed the same access to Britain. At the same time, established migrant communities continued to grow through family life and settlement.

The British Nationality Act, 1981: redefining citizenship

Immigration controls determine who may enter and stay; citizenship identifies someone’s legal membership of a country. These were increasingly separated. The Immigration Act 1971 distinguished people with the right of abode—the right to live in and enter Britain without immigration restrictions—from those who needed permission. Being a citizen of the UK and Colonies no longer necessarily meant having unrestricted access to Britain.

The British Nationality Act 1981, whose main provisions took effect on 1 January 1983, reorganised citizenship around people’s connections with Britain and its remaining dependencies. It replaced citizenship of the UK and Colonies with three statuses:

• British citizenship, for people closely connected with the UK.
• British Dependent Territories citizenship, for people connected with the remaining dependencies.
• British Overseas citizenship, for former citizens of the UK and Colonies who did not qualify for either of the other two statuses.

Existing citizens of the UK and Colonies who had the right of abode generally became British citizens automatically. The Act did not leave former holders of that citizenship without a citizenship, but the new categories did not all carry the same rights to live in Britain. It therefore strengthened the distinction between British citizenship and wider historical connections to the empire.

The Act also ended the general rule that birth in Britain alone was enough for automatic citizenship. From 1 January 1983, a UK-born child normally needed a qualifying parent who was a British citizen or settled in the UK at the time of birth. Settled meant ordinarily living in Britain without a time limit on permission to remain. Until 1 July 2006, the qualifying parent could be the mother or, if the parents were married, the father; from that date, either parent could qualify regardless of marriage.

For migrant families, this made parental status important to a child’s citizenship. A UK-born child of a settled migrant mother could qualify automatically even if the mother was not British. By contrast, birth in Britain to parents who both had only temporary permission to remain would not normally give automatic citizenship. The change concerned legal status, not whether a family felt culturally British.

Antiracism and race relations legislation

Responses to immigration were not uniformly hostile. Antiracist organisations pressed the government to address discrimination. In 1956, for example, an organisation called Racial Unity sought official inquiries into race relations. Opposition to restrictive legislation also challenged the idea that non-white Commonwealth citizens should be treated differently.

Government policy developed in two directions: restricting entry while extending protection for people living in Britain. The Race Relations Act 1965 prohibited racial discrimination in public places. The 1968 Act extended protection to employment and housing, addressing areas where colour bars had damaged migrants’ opportunities. The 1976 Act established the Commission for Racial Equality to investigate complaints and promote racial equality.

These laws mattered because they recognised discrimination as a problem requiring public action, rather than something migrants simply had to endure. However, legal protection did not immediately eliminate prejudice or unequal treatment. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 introduced stronger penalties for racially aggravated offences, showing that racist violence remained a concern in the 1990s.

Multicultural society and belonging

A multicultural society contains different cultural traditions and identities. The political question was not just whether Britain had become diverse, but how people should live together and what they should share. Integration could mean participating in common institutions, such as schools and workplaces, without abandoning a family’s cultural heritage.

A concrete debate developed in 2004 when Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission for Racial Equality, argued that multiculturalism encouraged separateness. He called for greater emphasis on common values, the English language and Britain’s cultural traditions. His concern was that recognising difference could leave communities living separately rather than sharing a sense of belonging.

Keith Vaz, a Labour MP, opposed imposing a single version of Britishness on people of different races, cultures and religions. He defended multicultural Britain as an achievement in which differences were celebrated. Riaz Ahmed, who had been mayor of Oldham during racial tensions there, argued that people could regard themselves as British, obey the law and still retain their heritage.

Others supported greater emphasis on shared identity. Labour minister David Lammy warned that multiculturalism risked encouraging polarised communities living alongside one another. He argued that younger generations, many born in Britain, needed to feel included as British citizens.

This was not simply a division between people who supported migrants and people who opposed them: leading minority politicians disagreed with one another. The debate concerned how to balance cultural diversity, equal treatment and a common national identity. It also showed why citizenship and belonging were different questions: having British citizenship did not settle arguments about what being British should mean.

Refugees and asylum seekers in the 1990s and 2000s

Not everyone migrated primarily for employment or family reunion. Refugees sought safety from persecution, while asylum seekers were people asking for protection whose applications had not yet been decided. These categories should not be confused with labour migration.

Asylum applications had risen from the 1980s. During the 1990s, Somalis escaping civil war were one group seeking refuge in Britain. Their circumstances connected immigration to Britain’s response to conflict elsewhere in the world.

Asylum became a contentious political issue. Governments introduced stricter checks, and applicants could face long waits for decisions or detention in immigration removal centres. Negative media coverage added to the difficulties they experienced. The debate involved a tension between providing protection to people in danger and demands for tighter control over entry and residence.

EU movement and the debate over borders

European Union membership created a different route for migration through free movement between member countries. This was distinct from applying for asylum or entering through Commonwealth immigration arrangements. EU ‘open borders’ in this debate meant movement rights for EU citizens, not unrestricted entry for everyone from every country.

In 2004, ten countries joined the EU, including Poland, Hungary and Lithuania. Within a few years, hundreds of thousands of Eastern European migrants had come to Britain. Many worked in farming, construction and hospitality, where employers welcomed their labour.

The effects were debated. Some areas experienced pressure on housing, schools and public services. Critics claimed that migrants took jobs from British workers or accepted lower wages. These claims expressed fears about competition; they should not be treated as proof that every migrant displaced a British worker.

Some newspapers also blamed migrants for crime, benefit fraud and NHS problems, often without evidence. The 2008 financial crisis, when unemployment was rising, intensified fears about jobs and resources. UKIP campaigned for stronger border control and withdrawal from the EU, connecting immigration with the question of who should control Britain’s borders.

By c.2010, immigration debates therefore concerned several different issues: racial equality, cultural belonging, protection for refugees, access to work and Britain’s international relationships. A continuing pattern was that migrants’ economic contributions could be welcomed while their presence remained politically contested.