VIEWS OF THE WEEK
Keeping Britain Whitish
HE White Paper on immigration must be one 1 of the most unedifying documents ever to come out of a British government office. One doubts if it could be read by a single person in this country, whatever his views on immigration, without his wincing at its hypocrisy and evasions. Its very language is sufficient to condemn it. Take, for instance, the blanket use of the word `immigrant' so that the world 'colour' is allowed to creep in only when the paper is obliged to name one of the voluntary liaison committees in full (the Council for the Welfare of Coloured Citizens), or the use of 'repatriate' for 'deport.' Or, again, the specious dressing-up of the pro- posals to give them some historical precedents ('Britain has always been reluctant . . It is only during the past sixty years that control has been continuously exercised over foreign immi- gration'), or the sick-making, supposedly delicate, references to 'certain problems' which have arisen because of the immigrants, to people 'ignorant of the normal social habits of this country'—as are how many of the British? One could go on and on. The point is that this paper is a surrender to racial prejudice, vilely dressed up to appear reasonable. No one disputes the right of this country or any other to control entry to her shores. But it is a service to no one to pretend that we are really doing something else, to claim, as the White Paper does, that we are already a multi-racial country, but cannot be expected to go any further.
Not so long ago Mr. Wilson referred to Mr. Peter Griffiths as a 'parliamentary leper.' One imagines that even the Prime Minister would shudder before. repeating that remark now. Even if the worst charges against Mr. Griffiths were true, he at least carried the leper's, bell. Like the immigrants •they are so concerned to keep out, Mr. Wilson and his Cabinet apparently carry their disease without knowing it.
The Labour party presented the right of coloured immigrants to come to this country, as they did so much else, as a moral issue. It is not for Conservatives, who never saw it in such simple terms, to dwell overmuch on this betrayal. But it is plain for the country to see. By dragging it in all over the place like some Jacobean Puri- tan, Mr. Wilson has devalued the word 'moral.' And the real moral authority of this country has rarely been so low, over Rhodesia, over South Africa and now over immigration.
It may be pleaded. (the White Paper does plead) that much can be repaired by the work of the voluntary liaison committees. But there is every likelihood that coloured citizens will view 'International Friendship Councils' and 'Co- ordinating Committees for Work among Com- monwealth Immigrants' with the same mixture of scepticism and derision as the average white, and probably more so. A better deal for immigrants will most likely come from pressure from the immigrants themselves. This pressure is already under way, and no one should underestimate its possible social and political consequences before it is fulfilled.
It is no use now to fall back on calling this a victory for the likes of Sir Cyril Osborne. Sir Cyril is one of the few people whose attitude on immigration has been consistent from the start, and he at least would never have been responsible for the shabby evasions of this White Paper. The paper is a victory for no one. More than show- ing up the pretensions of Harold Wilson, it is a defeat for the liberal centre and a defeat largely self-inflicted. We did not know in real terms what we wanted, we waffled and we wavered, we hoped for the best and we have got the worst. No one gave a lead, few attempted really to explore the problem, therefore we could suggest no practical alternatives. The liberal conscience was its own worst enemy. And it will happen again and again so long as liberals rely on good intentions and inadequate action.
Previous page
