University of Warwick institutional repository: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/wrap A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of Warwick http://go.warwick.ac.uk/wrap/38063 This thesis is made available online and is protected by original copyright. Please scroll down to view the document itself. Please refer to the repository record for this item for information to help you to cite it. Our policy information is available from the repository home page. Liberal Values and New Commonwealth Immigration: 1961 - 1981 Stephen Deakin This thesis is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy awarded by The University of Warwick. Research was carried out under the auspices of the Department of Politics, University of Warwick. This thesis was submitted in December 1987. SUMMARY Immigration to Britain from the New Commonwealth began in earnest in the late 1940s and the early 1950s. British governments, both Socialist and Conservative, found the issues raised by such immigration difficult to deal. with. This is evident from the succession of immigration control and race relations measures in the period 1961 to 1981. These dates mark respectively the Parliamentary debates on what became the 1962 Commonwealth Immigration Act and the 1981 British Nationality Act. As such these measures delineate clearly the development of this major policy area. One of the noticeable features of this policy area is the recognition by participants of the existence and importance of values and attitudes characterised by the term "liberal". Such liberal values were commonly associated with opinion formers in a wide variety of institutions, but particularly amongst leaders of the Labour and Liberal Parties, the churches and government- sponsored race relations bodies. This study examines the values and attitudes of such people and suggests that several themes have been predominant in the liberal response to race politics. Five themes are identified and discussed: a social determinist view of human behaviour together with a desire for rationality, equality, pluralism and community. These themes are examined for evidence of inconsistencies any or conflict of values, both within themselves and in relation to each other. The purpose throughout is not to question or criticise such liberal values; rather it is to study any inconsistencies within them. Contents Page Introduction 6 Part One: Reactions to New Commonwealth Immigration (1) The Labour Party 31 (2) The Liberal Party 78 (3) Race Relations Bodies 110 (4) The Churches 148 (5) The Indigenous Population 178 Summary of Part One 209 Part Two: Liberal Values Examined (6) A View of Man 212 (7) Rationality 237 (8) Equality 275 (9) Pluralism 310 (10) Community 342 Bibliography 365 3 Acknowledgement The supervision of Professor Jack Lively and Dr Zig Layton- Henry, both of the Department of Politics, university of Warwick, is acknowledged with gratitude. 4 DECLARATION Papers based on versions of chapters two and four of this thesis have already been published. They appeared, respectively, as: 'Immigration Control: The Liberal Party and the West Midlands Liberals: 1950 - 19701j in Immigrants and Minorities, Vol. 3. No. 3 November 1984. pp 297-311 and 'The Churches: Immigration and Race Relations', in New Community, Vol. XII# No. 1, Winter 1984-5 pp 101-115. This second paper produced a critical response which is considered in 'The Churches: Immigration and Race Relations: a Reply to Kenneth Leech', in New Community, Vol. XIIIr No. 1, Spring-Summer 1986, pp 109-110. 5 Introduction I Immigration from the New Commonwealth to Britain began in earnest after the end of the Second World War; slowly, but then in increasing numbers, immigrants from the Caribbean and from Asia settled in Britain. 1 During the late 1940s and much of the 1950s, this phenomenon produced a response in successive British governments and much established political opinion, of studied public detachment. However, as immigration increased, opposition to it began to appear amongst members of the indigenous population and, notablyr amongst some right-wing Conservative MPs. Violent racial disturbances between white Britons and black Britons in Nottingham and Notting Hill in 1958 brought some of the issues involved into the limelight. 2 However, many politicians of all parties were reluctant to control Commonwealth immigration. There were perhaps three main reasons for this reluctance. Firstly, there was a genuine and deep-seated fondness and sense of responsibility for the Empire and newly-emerging Commonwealth countries. Britain was seen as 'the Mother Country' to a family of mostly young nations. 3 Citizens of the Empire and Commonwealth were deemed to be British subjects; Britain was proud to operate an 'open Door' policy towards such people. They were allowed to enter and leave Britain at will, or settle permanently if they wished. This 'Open Door' policy was seen by much 6 established political opinion at the time as one of the factors binding the Commonwealth together. The Conservative Party Home Secretary told the House of Commons in 1961 that as much as a quarter of the world's popuýation were entitled to enter and settle in Britain via these provisions. 4 Secondly, immigration from the New Commonwealth was seen by many as a source of extra labour which Britain's economy desperately needed. Without such additions to the work force, it was suggested, Britain would not be able to match her competitors' economic performance or to fill jobs that needed doing. So it was that Enoch Powelle later to become well known for his views opposing New Commonwealth immigration, was instrumental in persuading workers from the Caribbean to come to Britain to work in the Health Service. Thirdly, the immigrants from the New Commonwealth were non-white; it was difficult, perhaps impossible, to draft legislation to control their numbers which did not at least appear to discriminate against them on racial grounds. Such discrimination was anathema to many British politicians, and to much established political opinion at that time. Support for immigration-controls was most marked amongst back-bench Conservative MPs and in local Conservative constituency associations. Gradually, pressure for controls built up in the Conservative government, and eventually a bill was introduced to control immigration from the Commonwealth. The 1962 Commonwealth Immigration 7 Act was the first piece of legislation to seek to control specifically immigration from the Commonwealth. It did this through a system of employment vouchers: category A vouchers were for those immigrants with a specific job awaiting them, category D vouchers were for those immigrants whose work skills were in short supply in Britain, and category C vouchers were available to all on a first come, first served, basis. Although the 1962 Act has great symbolism as the first Act to seek to limit directly New Commonwealth immigration, its effect on immigrant numbers was not that great: immigrationg increasingly that of dependants, continued at around 50,000 a year for much of the 1960s and 1970s. 5 This figure reflects the concern of successive governments not to act illiberally in this area. It is clear that the Conservative government brought in the 1962 Act with great reluctance. R. A. Butler, the Home Secretaryl introduced the Bill at the Second Reading debate in the Commons. He made only a half-hearted attempt to justify it and was ill-prepared to defend it. He began his speech: "It is only after long and anxious consideration and a considerable reluctance that the Government have decided to ask Parliament to control immigration from the Commonwealth". 6 The leaders of the Labour Party, the Liberal Party and the churches together with much established political opinion, as expressed in the quality press, vehemently opposed the Bill. Howeveri the Act was popular among the electorate and also among many party and 8 political activists outside Westminster. Labour and Liberal politicians found themselves under very strong pressure from their constituents to support immigration control. By 1965, the Labour Party# Liberal Party and the churches had all changed their policies and were supporting control of coloured immigration from the New Commonwealth. The Labour Party won the 1964 General Election and continued the policies of the 1962 Act; indeed, in 1965, the Labour Government drastically limited New Commonwealth immigration even further. Policy proposals in Labour's 1965 White Paper Immigration from the Commonwealth adopted similar arguments to the Conservatives' in 1962: the number of New Commonwealth immigrants was the key to harmonious race relations in Britain. These race relations, it was implied in the White Paper, were poor and under threat, hence more stringent immigration control was required. The White Paper's proposals included the abolition of the 1962 Act's C category vouchers for those with no jobs awaiting them, or without specific skills. 'The number of vouchers available to Commonwealth citizens was reduced to 8,500, one thousand of which were specifically allocated to Malta. It was also in 1965 that the Race Relations Act was passed. This Act, for' the first time in English law, specifically made racial discrimination in a public place an offence. It was now illegal to refuse anyone goods or facilities, for instance in a shop or public house, on the grounds of racial identity. The Act made a distinction between public and private places and did not, for example, 9 extend to the areas of employment and housing. The 1965 Act was also used as an opportunity to amend the 1936 Public order Act so as to make incitement to racial hatred an offence. Controversially, like the 1936 Act# the 1965 Race Relations Act did not require deliberate intent to incite racial hatred before an offence was committed. The 1965 Race Relations Act was subjected to much criticism, mainly from right-wing conservatives who doubted whether it would be effective, and who also saw the Act as an infringement of individual liberties.