Race and immigration from 1964-1970 Flashcards
What was immigration like before the commonwealth immigrants acts 1962?
- Before this Act was passed, citizens of Commonwealth countries had extensive rights to migrate to the UK.
- e.g. San Tin in Hong Kong, 85–90 percent of the able-bodied males left for the United Kingdom between 1955 and 1962 to work
What was the conservative’s party view on immigration?
There was widespread opposition to immigration in Britain from a variety of political groups, including the Conservative Monday Club, whose Members of Parliament were very active and vocal in their opposition to mass immigration.
What did leader of Labour Hugh Gaitskell think of the Conservative view on immigration?
- called the act “cruel and brutal anti-colour legislation”.
What was the commonwealth immigrant act in 1962?
In response to a perceived heavy influx of immigrants, the Conservative Party government tightened the regulations, permitting only those with government-issued employment vouchers, limited in number, to settle.
What happened in the 1964 election which caused concerns for racism?
- Constituency of Smethwick in the West Midlands of England gained national media coverage at the 1964 election
- when Peter Griffiths of the Conservative Party gained the seat against the national trend, amidst controversy concerning racism.
What was the situation of race and immigration when Labour took power?
- Immigration from “Commonwealth” continuing to grow: particularly from the Carribean, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh
- Survey of North London in 1965 showed that 20% of British people objected to working with black or asian people, 50% objected to living next door to a black person and 90% disapproved of mixed marriages.
- Increasing evidence of a ‘colour bar’
- In Kenya (achieved independence in 1963) increasing volatility between Kenyan Africans and Kenyan Asians/Europeans; immigration to Britain set to rise.
What were positive aspects to immigration and race?
- Notting Hill Carnival became annual from 1964.
- Appearance of asian corner shops and chinese takeaways introduced new foodstuffs
- Youth culture also drew from the ethnic communities fashion, music and street life
- Hippies of the late 1960s wore Indian and African cottons, kaftans, Arabian pants, Indian scarves and ethnic beads
- Others enjoyed west indian styles of music, jazz and ska or were attracted by Eastern ways and customs following the Beatles’ conversion under the guidance of the Maharaja Mahesh Yogi to meditation, yoga, ‘love and peace’, as well as soft drugs
What was the 1965 Race relations act?
- Forbade discrimination in public places ‘on the grounds of colour, race or ethnic or national origins’.
- Complaints were to be referred to the Race Relations Board whose job was to conciliate between the two sides.
How effective was the 1965 race relations act?
- discrimination in housing and employment was excluded.
What was the 1967 Kenyan Immigrants Act?
- Required Kenyans to acquire work permits in order to migrate to the UK
How effective was the 1967 Kenyan Immigrants Act?
- short term controversial cuts in Kenyan immigration
What was the 1968 commonwealth immigration act?
- Limited the right of return to Britain for non-white Commonwealth citizens.
How effective was the 1968 commonwealth immigration act?
- Promoted Enoch Powell to make ‘rivers of blood’ speech in April 1968. He was strongly condemned by the liberal Establishment. Heath sacked him.
- Public opinion was different. Strikes by dockers and 600 meat porters in London and protest march to Downing Street in response to his sacking with 92 page petition supporting him
- poll found 75% supported what Powell said.
What was the 1968 race relations act?
- Banned racial discrimination in housing, employment, insurance and other service
How effective was the 1968 race relations act?
- the board was given stronger powers but still loopholes
- Employers could discriminate against non-whites in the interests of ‘racial balance’
- complaints against the police were excluded from law.
- the race relations board upheld only 10% of the 1241 complaints it received about employment by Jan 1972
- the number of complaints remained low because victims had little faith in getting effective redress.