English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish Nationality

[pieface]

As a newly naturalised British Citizen, I had an interesting argument in the pub the other night, so I'd like the opinion of others on the board.

I was told by a native born friend, that despite being British, I could never claim to be English, as I wasn't born here. Despite the majority of my ancestry being of English stock (albeit 3rd gen NZ'er). Now this seemed like nonsense to me. Especially after pointing out Prince Phillip wasn't born here. The concept of English nationality (or any of the home countries) is a vague one being that England is a nation amongst a group of countries combined under one nationality.

Common sense in my thinking would dictate that you are an Englishman if you are:

- Born in England to British (or ILR) parents
- Born abroad to one or more English parents
- Naturalised in England (Welsh if natuaralised in Wales, Scottish if naturalised in Scotland etc.)

Eventually all involved agreed on these 'rules', but we wondered if there was any official criteria. One suggestion was that I'd be considered English if I had a Chelsea Football Club tattoo on my shoulder. Not a big fan of needles though.

So what do you good people think?

[sakura]

Hmmm...nationality and ethnicity...dangerous grounds!

To me, it all depends on whether "English" is seen as a cultural, ethnic or other category....like - is it similar to Japanese, French, German, Thai? Well, with Japanese, no one other than someone of 'Japanese blood' can be Japanese, so is that the same with "English"? (Actually, the Japanese issue is complex because some Koreans who change their names to Japanese names legally can claim Japanese nationality...odd.)

If it is a cultural thing...then it means anyone who can relate to "English" culture (and who also is in the country, as a PR or BC) is English. But, these days, even the English question what is their culture!

Most people would say it is having English ancestry. The thing is, in the UK there is another term - "British" - which generally people use as everything other than "White English/Irish/Scottish/Welsh". If you notice on the equal opportunities form..they do not have "Black English", or "Indian English", because "English" is seen as an ethincity? Well, I have yet to come across "Pakistani Welsh", have you? Then they have "White-other", like American, Dutch, South African, etc.

Does that make sense?

[JAJ]

I was told by a native born friend, that despite being British, I could never claim to be English, as I wasn't born here. Despite the majority of my ancestry being of English stock (albeit 3rd gen NZ'er). Now this seemed like nonsense to me. Especially after pointing out Prince Phillip wasn't born here.

Nor was the Duke of Wellington born in England.

Eventually all involved agreed on these 'rules', but we wondered if there was any official criteria.

Absolutely no "official" criteria. It would be the same if you had become an American citizen - would that automatically make you a New Yorker, Californian or Texan? Not unless you wanted to be.

Again anecdotally, evidence is that naturalised citizens in Australia, Canada, US, and probably Britain, identify more strongly with their new nation state, and less strongly with their state/region/county/province than do "native born" citizens.

One exception to all this is Switzerland. If you became naturalised Swiss, you would generally become a citizen of your canton and municipality, as well as of the Swiss Confederation. But the Swiss citizenship law is unusual.

[tekaweni]

Interesting question, and although legally a naturalised Brit is a Brit by any and all measures, as you go smaller by locality you find perceptions are based on your upbringing and specifically whether or not you grew up there.

I was born in South Africa and now live in Scotland. All four of my grandparents are Scot although my parents arent. So my living in Glesga is kinda like coming full circle. But I wouldnt wear the kilt because quite apart from having pipe-cleaner legs I wasnt raised in kilt-wearing circumstances. Its a local tradition I never knew. My grandpa does, but then he's always lived here.

Pieface: In my experience a lot of the reason born-and-bred Brits pick naturalised citizens out is that the cultural face of Britain is changing at a hell of a pace, much more than the rest of Europe. In fact I reckon in 20 years or so most citizens will be 1st or 2nd generation immies.

[JAJ]

Interesting question, and although legally a naturalised Brit is a Brit by any and all measures, as you go smaller by locality you find perceptions are based on your upbringing and specifically whether or not you grew up there.

This can affect "born" British citizens who move from one part of the United Kingdom to another. And then there are British citizens by descent, those from the Crown Dependies or those from current or former British territories.

In fact I reckon in 20 years or so most citizens will be 1st or 2nd generation immies.

There is a difference between "many" and "most". The scale of immigration required to bring about your envisaged scenario would not be tolerated by a government of any political persuasion.

[tekaweni]

Yeah, that was a bit over the top :-/ They have been tightening up on immigration recently, what with extending the period until ILR may be reached, doubling fees etc.

The bbc news page this morning has more about the Aussie-style points scheme the politicos have been mooting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6566453.stm

[Dawie]

Like I've just posted in another post, I'm not sure what the hell the immigration minister is going on about. He is proposing a points-based system for highly skilled migrants...err...doesn't that sound exactly like the HSMP which has been around for a few years already?

[tekaweni]

Yeah, exactly the same. I think whats new is they look to be making HSMP the *only* kind of work permit available.

[Dawie]

God knows what these people are up to. They are basically lying in the press by saying they planning to introduce a points-based system that has already been around for years! I guess most members of the general public wouldn't know about the HSMP so they can get away with it.

If they make the HSMP the only kind of work permit available then it won't be anything like the Australian system. In Australia you can still obtain an employer-sponsored work permit, in fact this is how most people get into Australia initially before attempting to apply for the Australian equivalent of the HSMP visa.

[jes2jes]

I wonder what would happen to the '80 Routes' of coming to the UK which I cannot work out in my mind yet.

Does someone know what would happen to all these 'routes'? Example, ancestry, spousal, refugees, minors, dependents, etc.

Let's wait for next year January.

[JAJ]

I wonder what would happen to the '80 Routes' of coming to the UK which I cannot work out in my mind yet.

Does someone know what would happen to all these 'routes'? Example, ancestry, spousal, refugees, minors, dependents, etc.

There are no proposals to change these in principle, although detailed rules may change (eg age for spouse visa to 21).