Access to the Law should be Available to All

I complained to the Equal Opportunities Commission on 28 November 1978 about foreign and Commonwealth men being allowed to live and work in the UK through marriage even though I (and other Englishmen) often cannot live and work in their countries through marriage. The EOC's response was that my complaint was outside its "ambit". But theEOC was at that time campaigning strongly on this issue - i.e., against Conservative Party policy to end the concession. So I complained to the European Commission of Human Rights about the EOC's failure to support my complaint. I was informed I should challenge the EOC in the UK courts.
To that end I applied for Legal Aid to determine whether the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act applied to immigration control. I qualified on financial grounds by contributing to the Legal Aid fund. But my application (ref. LW2/14/1/79/3630) was refused by the Law Society on 3 May 1979 because "The committee considered no cause of action had been established and that in all the circumstances it would be unreasonable that a Civil Aid Certificate be issued."
However, other people, none of them Englishmen as far as I can ascertain, were able to use the courts for that same purpose.
In R. v. Immigration Appeal Tribunal ex parte Kassam (22 February 1979) the High Court held that the Sex Discrimination Act had no application to the Home Secretary in performing his functions under the Immigration Act 1971. That decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal: [1980] 1 W.L.R. 1037.
Legal Aid was usually granted in order to determine a point of law.
On 7 July 1983 the House of Lords determined that the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act does not apply to immigration control. This was in the case of R. v. Entry Clearance officer, Bombay, ex parte Amin.
Therefore the EOC's campaign on this issue was illegal. It was also successful. Mrs. Thatcher backed down.
The European Commission of Human Rights had earlier (12 May 1982) determined that the complaints of three women (two foreign, one Commonwealth) whose husbands were not allowed to live and work in the UK to be "admissible". The ECHR did not, therefore, comply with Article 26 of the European Convention on Human Rights which states that all domestic remedies must be exhausted.
When the ECHR made its decision the Falklands Conflict was at its height. 255 British servicemen died, and, it is said, more than 255 have committed suicide since then.
British servicemen are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan.... Meanwhile, foreign and Commonwealth men take advantage of this loophole to occupy the UK.
The Conservatives still go on about marriage and migration - bogus and forced.
Failure by the Conservatives to keep their 1979 election promise sent out a signal that the British Government is weak and divided and ripe to be exploited.
On 27 August 2007 the BBC's Radio 4 "Today" programme included an interview with Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat MP, who argued that half a million illegal immigrants in the UK be granted an amnesty. (See also The Guardian, 28 August 2007.) It would not just be half a million; they would be able to bring in their relatives for legal settlement. Mr. Clegg justified his case by saying that after 14 years people who are in the UK illegally have the legal right to apply for British nationality. In other words, the law as it stands already legitimises criminals.

Remedial Work

Today, on BBC Radio 4's "Today" programme, it was revealed that in 2002 the Government introduced specialist work visas that enable workers and their families permanent residence in the UK after 4 years. So much for Tony Blair's mantra - "Education, education, education" - on becoming Prime Minister. In other words, there should be no need for specialist work visas. It turns out that some of the specialists are cab drivers.

The reason this became newsworthy is because the Home Office had realised that the system was being abused and wanted to change it, and some Members of Parliament regarded that as a violation of their human rights. Which "rights" was not stated. None of the Articles in the European Convention on Human Rights makes any mention of immigration control.

It is obvious to everyone that these people and their families are eligible to attend the Environment Agency's training schemes which "white English" cannot. Two reasons were given on yesterday's "Today" programme for this discrimination. One is that the law allows it. The other is to remedy injustices in the past.

If the Government wants to remedy past injustices, then the biggest injustice is that in 1979 the Conservative Government did not honour its election pledge to end the concession whereby foreign men can live and work in the UK through marriage.

Remedy that, Jacqui Smith (Britain's new Home Secretary), if you please.

Cruel Laws

Today, on BBC Radio 4's "Today" programme it was revealed that the Environment Agency has a training scheme which all may attend except "white English". When taken to task for this policy, the Agency officials (a man and a woman) were able to justify it by hiding behind the law - which allows it.
The 1951 law on refugees is frequently referred to as an international obligation which entitles people to circumvent normal procedures and enter Britain without a passport or visa. It was drawn up in light of events in Nazi Germany and with Communism in mind.
"White English" implies that some Englishmen are not "white" (Caucasian).
George Orwell never anticipated such a tyranny.

Division and Misrule

According to the "Daily Mail" website today:
"Up to 80,000 bogus asylum seekers have been granted an 'amnesty' to live in Britain.
"They have been in the UK for so long the Government has decided not to even bother considering their claims.
"It is the last shocking indictment of Home Office incompetence...."

Just as the British Empire was based on the principle of divide and rule, so many foreign and Commonwealth peoples exploit internal divisions (and incompetencies) within the UK to occupy the place.