§ 3.20 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 what restrictions have been placed on the right of male Commonwealth citizens to join their wives or fiancés for settlement in Britain.]
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the Government have decided that in view of the large numbers of male Commonwealth citizens coming here for marriage as a means of working and settling in this country, the concession under which they were previously allowed to settle here in right of their wife can no longer be maintained. In future the admission of husbands and fiancés from the Commonwealth for settlement will be restricted to cases presenting special features, and it will be a requirement that an entry certificate must have been obtained.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, while appreciating that Answer, may I ask my 210 noble friend whether the Government will take into consideration that perhaps the most basic human right of men and women who are either married or engaged to be married is to be able to meet each other and, in the latter case, to marry? May I also ask if the Government will take into consideration whether these new restrictions are not a repudiation of the European Convention of Human Rights to which this country is committed?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, the Government are satisfied that this is not in any way an infringement of the Government's stated policy about families. But there has been grave abuse of this facility. The number of fiancés and fiancées has increased sevenfold in the last four years, and an increasing number of cases have come to notice where marriages have been in name only or, even worse, where the woman has been an innocent or unwilling victim of a device to secure the man's admission. Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that a family would normally be expected to make its home in the husband's country rather than that of the wife.
With regard to my noble friend's last question, the Government are also satisfied that the new rules, applied on an humane and discretionary basis, will not infringe the United Kingdom's obligation under Article 8 of the Convention to respect family life. The United Kingdom system of immigration control contains ample safeguards for family life, including a statutory right of admission for Commonwealth citizens who are wives or children under l6 of men resident here, and the Government have no intention of modifying that statutory right. Indeed, under a Bill now in another place we are providing for appeals against refusals.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, again I thank my noble friend for that answer. Is he aware that I have full knowledge of the abuses which have been made of these rights? Nevertheless, is it not possible—I have some experience in this matter in trying to reunite families from behind the Iron Curtain—to have some personal investigation of the cases, to be quite sure that, where they are absolutely genuine, these men should not be prevented from joining those to whom 211 they are married or those to whom they hope to be married?
§ THE EARL OF SWINTONMy Lords, will the noble Lord accept for once a compliment if I may pay it, and accept the assurance that in the answers he has given he has the vast majority of the Members of this House, and I am sure the vast majority of the country, behind him in the action which he has taken?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I am most grateful for the noble Earl's assurance; but I also think that so far as the sentiments which my noble friend expresses are concerned, he also has behind him the vast majority of the people of this country. But while I acknowledge my noble friend's great experience, I think that on particular matters he is sometimes a bit "off the beam", as, for example, in his letter in The Times of the 5th of this month, which suggested that Russian girls would not be able to marry Englishmen. This new rule does not affect that matter in any way whatsoever. If only the Russians would permit the girls to leave Russia there would be no obstacle at all to their marrying Englishmen.
As to the application of this new decision, we will always have in mind humane considerations appertaining to the individual applications—and they will be taken individually—which will enable us to take full account of any special ties which exist with this country or, indeed, any special factors which should enable us to admit a husband.
§ LORD BROCKWAYMy Lords, I am sorry to intervene again, but I must, after that reply. Is this not a case of sex discrimination?
§ LORD BROCKWAYAll right. Listen. Is it not a case that a Commonwealth girl can come here to marry a British man, but that a Commonwealth man cannot come here to marry an English girl?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, this is not at all a case of sex discrimination. It is a case of a sensible measure to prevent exploitation. In the last twelve months 1,676 men came here as fiancés or husbands compared with under 4,000 who came here with employment vouchers. 212 Such an abuse makes nonsense of the control. We are going to administer this rule humanely, in such a way that there will be no unfair discrimination; but we are certainly not going to have our controls shot full of holes, and I am sure that Parliament will support us in this.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether it is possible for a man to bring more than one wife or Commonwealth wife in as a dependant?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, that is rather another question; but as is the case with most of the suggestions made by my noble friend, it is a most interesting possibility.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, this is a most serious question. It is the habit in some of the countries from which our immigrants come for them to have up to four wives; and if an immigrant does come here and say that he has more than one wife, do we admit them?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, I do not see how this matter arises out of this particular Question. I have answered this question before, and I told my noble friend (it must be within her recollection) that so far as wives are concerned our regulations do permit the admission of more than one wife. But I have also told her that, so far as our records show, we have no knowledge of any case where more than two have been admitted. Although it was a serious inquiry, I must again remind my noble friend that it does not arise out of this particular Question.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLMy Lords, may I put this supplementary question, having now really got my noble friend to admit this? I have in the past observed that he has evaded an answer and treated the question as a joke. If we are going to reduce immigrants in this way, surely here is a case that should be looked at.
§ BARONESS SUMMERSKILLDoes my noble friend realise that if more than one wife is brought in these wives have babies, and this is in fact going to be a pressure on our social services?
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, these factors are within our realisation, but to alter these conditions at the present (and there has been no abuse here; I emphasise this—no abuse at all) would require inquiries into marriage and other customs, such as religious customs, in those countries, which the Government have not thought it right to enter into.