Immigration laws: more racist than ever

Labour Briefing no. 59, 22 March 1988, p. 11

Transcribed or corrected by hand from the printed page.

By-line as printed: Phil Hearse (Islington North CLP).

Three thousand people marched through London on Sunday March 6th against the Tories' new immigration law.

Contingents of the Indian Workers Associations from around the country provided at least half the demonstrators; but the turnout from the labour movement was poor.

NALGO was the only union officially represented, and even the far left was limited to a token presence.

Of course, it was the day after the massive March 5th NHS demo [–] but that is not the main explanation. Many comrades on the left still don't even know about the new law. Comrades, it's time to wake up.

The main aim of the new law is to make it even more difficult for black people to bring their families to this country. It has the subsidiary objective of making racist political capital for the government.

Under the new law, people in this country with spouses abroad will have to prove conclusively that they can financially support and accommodate them before they will be allowed to enter the country. No provision is made for the possibility that wives or husbands will be able to work and contribute to their own support.

Of course, this measure will be applied in a racist way. You are going to find it much easier to bring your Swiss boyfriend or girlfriend into the country than your Bangladeshi wife or husband.

This new attack on the right of family reunion comes at a time when the number of emigrants now far exceeds the number of immigrants. Its racist intent couldn't be clearer.

For the first time "overstaying" will be made a criminal offence. Each day of overstaying will be a new, additional offence, and subject to separate penalties. Overstayers, or alleged overstayers, will be subject to summary deportation by the police.

It is going to be made much harder to campaign against deportation. Several stages of legal procedure – including the right of MPs to intervene and the right of appeal to the Immigration Appeals Adjudicator – are effectively being removed.

Someone who claims to be a British citizen but cannot produce a passport to prove it will be subject to summary deportation. This will apply mainly to people arriving at airports. Again, rights of appeal and of intervention by welfare organisations are being eroded.

Extraordinary

Another extraordinary feature of the new Bill is the provision which will in future prevent "second or subsequent" wives of polygamous marriages coming into this country. In fact, over the past decade, fewer than 30 people from polygamous mariages entered the country. This measure is a transparent attempt to make the issue of polygamous families a racist "issue" – one which will go down well with sensationalist tabloids.

Many on the left may have imagined immigration law was already as racist as it could get. But never underestimate the ingenuity of the Home Office.

The March 6th demonstration was organised by the Campaign Against Racist Laws, a small group of people who should be congratulated for their persistence in the face of widespread indifference. It is really not acceptable that hundreds of black workers should mobil[i]se on the streets on this issue, and get such scant support from the labour movement

It is late in the day to fight back on this particular issue [–] but not too late to raise it. And it is certainly not too late to take up the fight on behalf of those threatened with deportation, like Viraj Mendis, and Marion Gaima in Hackney.

transcribed from the page image, 2 Nov 2026; spelling as printed (mariages, beside polygamous; 'Indian Workers Associations' without apostrophe). By-line 'By Phil Hearse / Islington North CLP' in rules in the second column; the article fills the lower middle of page 11 and is complete there. Print damage: the i in 'mobil[i]se' did not print and is supplied; two dashes that did not print (after 'NHS demo' and after 'particular issue') are supplied as [–]; a dash before 'one which will go down well' is faint but present; no full stop is visible after 'labour movement' at the end of that paragraph, and none is added. Left out: the Dave Palmer article 'The New Right: "Maoist" Thatcherism and Clause 28' above, and the Outwrite women's newspaper advertisement.