BritCits

When is a migrant no longer a migrant?

By Sonel

There has been considerable discussion of migrants in the UK recently. Whether you think they’re a burden on the taxpayer as the government would have you believe, or whether you place faith in data demonstrating migrants are net contributors, the question remains - at what point do you stop being a migrant? For my part, I was born in India, raised in Australia and ‘grew up’ in the UK. 

I was born where my mother went into labour.  Were it not for a quirk of fate, I would have been born in the USA.  But would I truly have been able to call myself American simply because I was born there?

I was brought up where my parents decided they, and thus I, should live.  My schooling, environment and friends are a massive part of the person I am today; possibly the most influential element as it is these years that I think are the most formative in a person’s life – certainly they have been for me to date at least.  Is where you were raised therefore the factor in deciding whether you’re a migrant or not?

I ‘grew up’ in the place I have chosen to be in at the first point in life when I was able to make this decision for myself and exercise any real control over my geographical location.  A place where I learned to be an adult; do things on my own, pay bills, cook my own food, choose where and with whom I lived.  Is the exercise of free choice the deciding factor?

As a second generation Aussie, first generation Brit, privileged to have Indian ancestry, answering the question ‘where are you from’ thus requires trying to ascertain what it is the questioner actually wants to know.  My place of birth?  Heritage?  Source of physical appearance? Origin of accent? Citizenship status?

The part of the UK I am currently living and working in?  I understand my name, appearance, accent, personality and location don’t all match up to any one stereotype - is it this supposed mystery perhaps that renders people more free to ask me this question than they would to anyone else, or is this in fact a ‘normal’ question everyone gets asked? 

I don’t recall ever being asked where I was from whilst in Australia.  The default assumption of Aussies always seemed to be that others too were Australian – a legacy perhaps of the relative newness of Australia as a nation (in the form we know it in today) where all but the Australian aborigines are migrants.  I realise now this cocoon of mutual acceptance is perhaps not the norm in the UK, with media referring to “an Asian man” as opposed to “a man of Asian appearance”, be it that the man is British.   

So when does one stop being a migrant?

Is it with the little red book in your hands, having pledged allegiance to the Queen – which those born here incidentally don’t have to go through?  Does it depend on place of birth?  Is one able to shed the ‘migrant’ label after a certain number of years living in the UK?  Does your family have to have been living here for a certain number of generations before you’re truly accepted?  Or is it more a case of physical appearance.  If you don’t look Caucasian can you ever truly be British?

Does it come down to the Tebbit test? You’re only British if you support the UK teams in all sports.  If so, how would one reconcile this with the Welsh and Scots who support any team playing against England?

I know there won’t ever be consensus on this as for many it’s an emotional and personal question; even statistics reporting on migrants don’t use a consistent definition - causing more confusion. 

What though are your thoughts?