§ 2.40 p.m.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether an apology has been made to Mrs. Kathleen Cattouse, wife of the Deputy Premier of British Honduras, for her treatment by the immigration officials at Heathrow Airport on March 23.]
§ LORD STONHAMNo, my Lords. Mrs. Cattouse was medically examined under the normal arrangements which are, I am sure, well understood, and for which Her Majesty's Government see no need to apologise. The Home Office were given clearly to understand that Mrs. Cattouse was not content to come as a visitor, that is to say, for a fixed period of up to six months in the first instance, and she was granted an entry certificate that gave her the advantage of unconditional admission so that she could stay permanently, or for as long as she liked. This meant that she came within the category of those for whom 1426 medical examination is required, and the immigration officer acted correctly and in accordance with his instructions.
Medical examinations at ports are carried out by doctors, and any request to a passenger to remove clothing for a medical examination would be made only by the doctor or his assistant acting under his instructions, and not while the passenger was with an immigration officer. The Government are considering how far it would be possible to arrange for immigrants to be medically examined in their country of origin, instead of on arrival in this country.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I thank my noble friend particularly for the last sentence of his reply. Is it not the case that Miss Nadia Cattouse was given assurances at the Home Office, and that communications were sent to the immigration officials in British Honduras in order to remove any difficulties should her mother, the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of British Honduras, come to this country? Further, is it not the case that, nevertheless, this woman of growing years, after the exhaustion of the long air journey from America, was kept in detention for an hour and a half and was asked to unclothe to the waist for medical examination? Does my noble friend think that that is a desirable procedure to follow in the case of a woman of this kind?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, it is certainly the case that Miss Nadia Cattouse visited the Home Office and saw the Home Office officials about the demand she made in British Honduras for her mother to have a return air ticket. As my noble friend suggests, our people in the Home Office cabled at public expense and said that because Mrs. Cattouse wanted to come here indefinitely or permanently, and because she was over 60, she had every right to come, and an entry certificate was granted. She was not with the immigration officer for more than one minute or perhaps two minutes on arrival, and perhaps one minute after the medical examination.
Mrs. Cattouse had a leaflet which clearly states:
Holders of Ministry of Labour vouchers and other Commonwealth citizens who are coming for a long time will normally be examined by the medical inspector when they arrive.1427 It is, I would submit, with respect to my noble friend, an abuse of language to describe a medical examination in the excellently fitted, equipped and staffed medical unit at Heathrow as "detention". Of course I understand the feelings of Miss Nadia Cattouse. I have read her letter in The Times of Saturday last. But when she asks:Has a Canadian or an Australian lady, because she is white, been examined?my answer is categorically: Yes, thousands of them. And if we have a rule approved by this House, sought by Parliament, that there shall be medical examination because of the fear of pulmonary tuberculosis, then it would be wrong to discriminate.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, will my noble friend forgive me if I press the matter just a little further, because I feel it is so important for race relations. He mentioned an Australian or a Canadian lady. Does he really think that if the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, or the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of Canada came to this country, she would be subjected to the same treatment that the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of British Honduras underwent? May I urge him, because of the importance of this treatment in a sense of racial equality, to encourage the immigration officials at Heathrow and elsewhere, who have a difficult task, to show discretion and equality in these matters?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the immigation officers and the medical officers have instructions, and they carry them out. With regard to my noble friend's question about the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia or of Canada, if the same conditions applied—that is to say, that the lady in question was over 60 and was going to live here more or less permanently—then either of these ladies would have been subject to the same regulations, and they might well have been asked to have a medical examination.