Keep Britain White

Keep Britain White

Keep Britain White

‘Keep Britain White’ has been a political slogan for Britain from Churchill to Powell - its roots in the racial categories of the British Empire. In 2022, argubly Britain is still attempting to deport non-white people.

Rwanda is one of the smallest countries on the African mainland, popular for many touristic reasons. However, it is the controversial immigration policy they made with the UK that has thrust them into the limelight. With no ties to Britain (it had previously been a French speaking colony) the Rwandan president had been campaigning to become a part of the English-speaking world. Arguably, this controversial immigration deal they have made with the UK may contribute towards the links to Britain that they are seeking. 

What is this controversial immigration policy?

When thinking of immigration and immigrants, many black people remember campaigns to ‘Keep Britain White.’ It was in January 1955 that Churchill (allegedly) suggested in order to win the approaching election, they needed a slogan. He suggested a good message was ‘Keep England White.’ The beloved Prime Minister came under fire during the Black Lives Matter protests when a statue of him was defaced. He was accused of being a racist but was vehemently defended by white Britain despite him being involved in the Boer War – a very bloody colonial affair which resulted in the creation of the Bengal famine – which killed approximately 3 million people. 

Churchill was also adamant at restricting Caribbean people coming to Britain, detailing that Caribbean migration was ‘the most important subject facing this country’. He consequently told the governor-in-chief of Jamaica, Sir Hugh Foot, that the Caribbean presence in Britain would create ‘a magpie society’, and ‘that would never do’.

And then of course, there was the Keep Britain White Campaign spearheaded by Enoch Powell. In his famous Rivers of Blood speech where he criticised immigration, he talked about the black man having the whip over the white man – exposing the white fear of the black man seeking revenge for slavery and the slave trade. It stands to reason that beneath unfair immigration policies lurk the white fear of black and brown people becoming the majority, taking over White Britain and using their power to punish white people. They fear a Black Britain.

More recently there was the Windrush scandal of 2018. The government identified black people who they deemed as illegally remaining in the UK. These people were wrongly detained, denied legal rights and threatened with deportation. In at least 83 cases, they were wrongly deported from the UK. All in a bid to get Britain’s immigration levels down. And so when high profile cases of immigrants entering Britain on boats filled the tabloids, it did two things: it fuelled the fear of this 'Black Britain' that the white population has, and it put pressure on the government to act. 

In November last year, it was reported that at least 26 people drowned in the English Channel while trying to make their way to Britain. The International Organisation for Migration said, ‘it was the biggest single loss of life in the Channel since it began collecting data in 2014.’  Boris Johnson said he was "appalled" by the situation and added Britain would leave "no stone unturned" to put a stop to these human trafficking gangs.

According to YouGov in November 2021 the issue of immigration is one that is of top priority to Britain. Demonstrated through the various ‘Keep Britain White’ campaigns going all the way back to Churchill, it is clear that immigration has been a top, lasting, priority for white Britain for many years. In the YouGov report of November 2021, British people have ‘immigration and asylum’ in their top three most important issues facing the country.

The loss of life on the Channel of immigrants, and the public’s concerns on immigration put pressure on the government to act.  And this is where Rwanda comes in.  

The British government signed an agreement with Rwanda in April, to deport its asylum seekers to the East African nation. Headed by Priti Patel, Rwanda wasn’t the first choice. Both Ghana and Albania rejected the scheme. Rwanda was offered (initially) £120 million ($155 million) plus operational costs to resettle Britain’s asylum seekers. Being deported to Rwanda is supposed to be a deterrent to all those who seek to come to the UK illegally; remaining in Britain will not be an option. 

The government claims that this policy will ensure “safe and legal routes for asylum seekers while disrupting the business model of people smugglers” and “anyone entering the UK illegally, as well as those who have arrived illegally since 1 January, may now be relocated to Rwanda.’ 

The number of people arriving in this country runs into its thousands. Border Force staff expect 60,000 people to arrive in the country by these unsafe boats in 2022. (This figure was made before the crisis in Ukraine). This number has more than doubled from last year, which was 28,526. Yet instead of tackling the complex issues on why people are fleeing, the government is attempting to place them elsewhere.

What makes this policy so controversial?

Asylum seekers are looking for protection from persecution and serious human rights violations. But at the moment of arrival, they are not recognised as legal and are fleeing their country. Seeking asylum is a human right, therefore it seems almost paradoxical sending asylum seekers to a country with a poor human rights record. Human Rights Watch’s most recent report on Rwanda says:

  • “The ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) continued to exert total control over political space in Rwanda in 2019.
  • “President Paul Kagame and other senior government officials regularly threatened those who criticise the government or the RPF. Several opposition members and one journalist disappeared or were found dead in mysterious circumstances.”
  • “Arbitrary detention, ill-treatment, and torture in official and unofficial detention facilities continued, according to credible sources. Human Rights Watch continued to document the illegal detention and ill-treatment of street children in Kigali.”
  • “State interference and intimidation have forced many civil society actors and journalists to stop working on sensitive political or human rights issues. Most print and broadcast media continued to be heavily dominated by pro-government views.”
  • “Independent civil society organisations are very weak, and few document and expose human rights violations by state agents.”

Britain has a reputation of being humane. This act of sending asylum seekers to a country which this record has been deemed as ‘irresponsible.’ Others who vehemently oppose this immigration policy say it is cruel and inhumane. It has also been widely criticised by over 160 charities, the Archbishop of Canterbury, opposition political parties and even Tory backbenchers including former Prime Minister Theresa May. There have been over 150 organisations, including the United Nations, that have called Britain’s new immigration policy ‘unacceptable.’

Despite all of this, the government still continues to defend the new scheme, insisting it will break the ‘business model of vile people smugglers.’ Yet this scheme is causing fear among some asylum seekers. 

According to The Refugee Council and The Red Cross, the scheme has caused some to go into hiding and one person to attempt suicide. Priti Patel has admitted that the process will ‘take time’ and still continues to push it through ignoring criticism that there is not enough evidence to show that it is value for money and that the policy gives “no answers” to solve the problem of dangerous crossings in small boats. On the contrary, Patel insists that it will ultimately save lives, and according to Johnson, Rwanda has “capacity to resettle tens of thousands of people in the years ahead” and that there is ‘no cap on numbers.’

What happened on that first flight?

The first flight was halted at the last minute on the 14th June. Originally, there were 130 people set to be deported on this flight, but they submitted legal challenge after legal challenge until less than 10 remained. The figure then fell to three, and then to one before the flight, costing around £500,000, was cancelled altogether. However, the British government plans to challenge this and are preparing the next flight to deport more immigrants to Rwanda. ''Preparation for the next flight begins now," Home Secretary Priti Patel  had said.

About 8,400 migrants crossed the English Channel in 2020, and more than 28,000 made the journey in 2021 according to UK government figures. Detected arrivals of this type have increased from 229 in 2018 to over 28,000 last year. Reports like this fuel the white fear of being the minority in Britain, echoing the Rivers and Blood speech of 1968: ‘The black man will have the whip over the white man’. - Enoch Powell. 

Is it all a smokescreen to just get rid of people of colour before they settle in this country?

Immigration was a deciding factor when considering leaving the EU. The famous ‘breaking point’ poster with Nigel Farage again, played into this white fear that immigrants were people of colour flooding into their country. The political idea of keeping Britain white was again, powerful. It does pose the question about whether this new immigration policy is really about saving lives, or removing as many non-white people from Britain as possible. The government, after all, is reflective of the majority of this country. And with a leader who has historically referred to black children as ‘smiling paccannies’ with ‘watermelon smiles’, as well as comparing muslim women to ‘letterboxes’, it would not be surprising to find out that the immigration policy is, after all, about removing as many people of colour from Britain as possible. This would alleviate what appears to be a very real white fear of a Black Britain.