Falkland Islands (British Citizenship) (Hansard, 22 June 1982)

§ Mr. Robert Kilroy-Silk (Ormskirk)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to enable citizens of the Falkland Islands to acquire British citizenship.

I do not propose to use the time allotted, because the merits of this Bill are self-evident and will command considerable support both inside and outside the House, as did the principle of the matter when it was discussed during debates on the Bill that became the British Nationality Act 1981. You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that the principle of allowing citizens of the Falkland Islands to acquire British citizenship if they so desired was debated both in this Chamber and in another place. On both occasions it obtained considerable support but was denied by the Government.

The British Nationality Act gave British citizenship to 1,400 Falkland Islanders who have a grandparent or parent born in Britain. They now have the right of entry, abode and employment in the United Kingdom. However, the Act denied British citizenship to 400 islanders who to all intents and purposes are British but who are not fortunate enough to have a parent or grandparent, but instead a great-grandparent, born in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, they are as British as their more fortunate compatriots who have been designated British citizens.

Every one, not least the Falkland Islanders, is aware that when the British Nationality Act was debated the Home Secretary gave a clear and specific assurance that in desperate times the Islanders would be allowed to enter Britain. He used a phrase that was reiterated many times during the debates and more recently by Foreign Office spokesmen and said that they would be given "every sympathetic consideration".

That may well be the case, but it is not right that Falkland Islanders who are now citizens of British dependent territories and who have no right of entry or abode or to work here, but only the right to leave and enter the Falkland Islands, must rely upon the compassion, good will and the good nature of the Home Secretary or the Government. If it is right to say that to all intents and purposes they have British citizenship and that they will always be allowed to settle or to work here, it is equally right to put that on a regular basis and to enshrine it in law by giving them British citizenship.

We have accepted that. We assembled a massive task force and sent it half way round the world—the much publicised 8,000 miles—at great expense and with considerable loss of life. I endorsed and supported that expedition then, as I do now. As the Prime Minister said, we were fighting for a principle, to demonstrate that aggression does not pay and that no country, be it a dictatorship or a democracy, can take over the territory or subjugate the citizens of another country. However, we were fighting for something more than that, or at least the Prime Minister said that we were. She said constantly that we were fighting to protect British citizens and the British way of life. That is correct, but the British way of life that we fought successfully to protect applies to all 1,800 islanders, not just to the 1,400 who were fortunate to qualify for British citizenship.

It was absurd to deny citizenship to the 400 when the Act was debated. It would be indefensible to deny them today. They are British in their language, heritage, 165 descent, traditions, way of life and, above all, by choice. It would be churlish now, after all that Britain has experienced on their behalf, to deny them British citizenship in practice.