Semi-structured interviews
This dissertation makes extensive use of the semi-structured interview as a data collection tool. The method enabled a reconstruction of the making of immigration policy, as told to the author by key actors, such as politicians, senior civil servants and migration scholars. The interview is a complex tool, practice or even philosophy in itself. Fontana and Frey say that traditionally, the researcher has seen the interview as an ‘informal conversation’ with the interviewee.23 The better interviews acknowledge their flaws, are reflective and open about the process. The epistemological question has a bearing on this. Kvale says that ‘a miner [or excavating] approach will tend to regard interviews as a site of data collection separated from the later data analysis’ while ‘a traveller conception leads to interviewing and analysis with an emphasis on the narrative to be told to an audience’.24
The 28 interviews conducted for this research (see List of Interviewees in Appendix) led to a better understanding of the processes and the personal or collective philosophies that have shaped immigration policy across the period. The material gathered from interviews was not intended to provide a window into reality – if that were even possible – but to provide a range of perspectives on, and perceptions of, immigration and policy-making. While interviews did provide in-depth contextual information to factual events, of greater significance was the disclosure of the interpretations, understandings, and motives of the interviewees. Interviews also allowed for the pursuit of unforeseen lines of inquiry.25 The interviews were used to help
identify (more clearly) who held power and who influenced decisions within a multi-actor model, meaning the individuals and organisations both within and outside the Conservative Party. In order to guard against the inevitable bias which interviewees offer, the data was corroborated by triangulation against documents and a wide sample of interviewees.
The importance of interviews with elites to this research is partly based on practical considerations. As the research covers a relatively recent period (the post-war decades, that is, 1945 to 2015), it was expected that the work might be hindered by the need for reliance
on methods other than analysing ‘released’ government documents, which are only put into the public domain after a set period. Having said that, the period in question has recently been reduced to 20 years, from 30 years, and will be phased in over the next decade.26 Strategic sampling was used in order to identify those who might be potential interviewees. A list was produced based on those with influence and experience of the issue under research. It was expected that access to elite participants, namely politicians and policy-makers, would be a problem. Some potential participants may see interviews as a possible threat to their own or their organisation’s reputation, some may simply be too busy. Others may have misgivings about what they will gain from being interviewed, and some organisations (such as the civil service) may have policies against on-the-record interviews for fear of bringing their impartiality or reputation into question. Given that it is usually easier to obtain interviews with politicians when their party is in opposition, or they have left power, it was something of an impediment for this thesis that the Conservatives were in government during the course of this research.
One means of gaining access was to use the networks of contacts of previous participants in the research, but this was not without its problems. Each interviewee was asked if they could suggest colleagues or contacts who may able to assist with the research. While this was generally a successful practice, as it confers trust and respectability on the researcher, it has serious implications. Divulging the names of other interviewees would not only reveal identities; to do so could breach confidentiality and even disseminate private information. Some interviewees made suggestions, but asked the author not to disclose their names for fear it might prejudice their contact. Those interviewed were current and past policy-makers (including former Secretaries of State and ministers), prominent backbenchers, current and former senior civil servants, retired Conservative Research Department staff, as well as academic experts in the field of British immigration policy.
It was understood that the format of the interview (the structure and how issues are framed) would strongly impact on the research because, from an epistemological perspective, it is questionable what format is the ‘best’ way of producing knowledge. Kvale says that
‘presupposing that knowledge emerges from a collection of given data will naturally lead to a view of leading questions as a bias in qualitative interviewing [which is] detrimental to the process of acquiring objective knowledge’.27 And yet, for a researcher who thinks that
‘knowledge is socially constructed [it] can lead to a view of leading questions as one way of inquiring into the strength and justifiability of a subject’s beliefs, perhaps even yielding another form of objectivity in the sense of provoking the object to object’.28
Bearing in mind such issues, interviews were conducted with participants in their offices or in public places, that is, in spaces in which they were likely to feel comfortable and confident. The interviews were semi-structured and loosely based on a list of suitable questions (some interviewees asked to see these in advance). Most interviews were conducted face-to-face, and a few were undertaken by telephone, and a further few by email. Time was also spent researching each interviewee’s career and public statements so as to allow for a more productive interview. Interviews were, where possible, audio recorded, transcribed and coded according to themes that became apparent during the course of the research. It was important that the structure was flexible because the author had to be able to quickly adapt if the situation changed, as happened several times. Many of the interviewees were under time constraints which meant sudden changes to a schedule. The format was also flexible to allow the author to continually revise her assumptions. It was necessary to consider whether the view was consistent with interpretation and, if not, to amend it. Rosenblatt refers to an unstable, metaphorically physical process: ‘I try out my interpretations on the people I interview, I push as I interview for more information consistent and inconsistent with my changing interpretations’.29
Grey material/ document analysis
This thesis makes use of document analysis of ‘grey material’ in order to reconstruct the processes of policy-making. The term ‘grey material’ includes government documents (white papers, green papers, commissioned research evidence, consultation papers, press releases and transcripts of speeches) and non-government documents (official responses to policy
from interest groups, publications from such interest groups, speeches by experts, Hansard transcripts, technical reports). The material may be published in print and electronic formats, but it is not controlled by commercial publishers as per the ‘Luxembourg definition’ of grey literature. Such material is highly valued by researchers given it is often original documentation and relatively recent.
Grey material is critical to the project as it has not only allowed for the production of a ‘timeline’ of immigration policy, based on the documents from before, during and after policy production and implementation, but it has also provided what could be a more nuanced look at the role of ideas in policy formation. In looking at the ‘debris’ related to the Conservative Party and the development of immigration policy, the intention was to bring to the fore those influences behind policy formation which may not normally be noted in histories of the Party. Examination of the documents has enabled greater understanding of the power struggles between, and among, individuals, interest groups and institutions with an interest in immigration policy.
The process of analysing grey material focused on key terms, legislation and events during the period in question. Of a variety of information sources, the most extensively referred to sources are the publications of the Conservative Party (such as its general election manifestos) and the transcripts of speeches by politicians. The material was located both online (on organisations’ websites) and in hard copy (within organisations’ archives and within individuals’ private effects). Efforts were concentrated on significant ministries and agencies within government (UK Border Agency, Home Office, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Treasury) as well as non-governmental organisations (employers’ bodies such as the CBI and IoD, trade unions within and outside the TUC such as Unison and the TGWU, respected think-tanks, such as the IPPR and Demos, Migration Watch, parliamentary committees, and also groups of experts, such as the Westminster Forum.
However, as this author notes, research which uses grey material is not without its problems. Such material is often very difficult to obtain through conventional means due to the fact that it is not published commercially nor generally promoted to researchers. Ignorance of the
existence of such material, and inaccessibility, were therefore major concerns. Furthermore, as grey material may have few users, and does not generate profit, there may be little incentive for organisations to properly maintain and catalogue such material. This may make research more difficult, as basic details may be hard to obtain, and there may be inconsistencies regarding the storing of documents. As this author found, documents may not be available in full, may have been scanned improperly or there may be ‘broken’ online links. Less concretely perhaps, any research which uses documentary sources must acknowledge they are not neutral sources.30 Finnegan is more specific – ‘when analysing policy statements it may be difficult to differentiate between how far the policy presents normative propaganda or an actual guiding principle for practice’.31 There is never a full and definitive account: it
is always a matter of judgement or interpretation.
Archive material/ document analysis
This thesis also uses document analysis to examine archive material in order to better understand the opinions, debates and conflicts of the time. The centrality of archive material to the research project stemmed from a wish to use original sources to form an evidence- based history of immigration policy development as well as providing material for ‘thick- descriptive’ work, which is lacking in this field. Archive material refers mainly to documents that are produced in the conduct of affairs and broadly centred around a theme (for example, migrants’ experiences of settling within the UK) or organisation (such as the Conservative Party).
Archives were used to examine how events and policies are constructed within the interconnected political machinery of party, press and interest groups. Analysis of such material provided a means to track the developing importance of the immigration issue over time, as responsibility for immigration policy was transferred from different departments, put out for consultation and chewed over by focus groups. For example, the direction of policy was, at times, fought over by Conservative Party officials and party activists putting forward conference motions regarding how tough the Party should be on the issue.
The archive material studied included minutes of meetings, notes, papers, photographs, letters, policy proposals and strategies. Government sources were found at the National Archives in Kew, London. It should be noted, however, that sources were only available up to the mid-1980s, as they are restricted after this date due to the 30 years’ disclosure rule. Of particular use were the Cabinet Paper archives, especially the sections on Empire, Commonwealth and De-colonisation, and the Home Office collection, with sections on Aliens and Immigration, Denization and Naturalisation, Community Relations. The author also examined documents from those departments most relevant to immigration, citizenship and asylum, namely the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Treasury. Non- government sources were mainly found within the Conservative Party archives, located at the Bodleian Library, Oxford. The Thatcher Archives, much of which is online now via the Thatcher Foundation, with the entirety being stored at Churchill College, Cambridge, were used too. The analysis of archive material was very similar to that used on grey literature, with a focus employed on key words, legislation and related events in order to construct a narrative of the period in question.
Primary archive material was complemented by thousands of media articles from 1945 to 2015, which were found using relevant keywords on Nexis, the online database of news sources. The sources used were mainly UK national newspapers, with the remainder being local papers and occasionally international news sources (mainly from India or Pakistan). Of great use to this thesis too were the dozens of memoirs by former British politicians from across the political spectrum, from those who held the Conservative leadership to those who were ministers or backbenchers with an interest in immigration. Academic literature on the history of the Conservative Party was a source of context too.
The heavy reliance of this thesis on archive material raised a number of questions. As with research on grey literature, there were concerns over selectivity. Why are some documents kept and others destroyed? Some say ‘selective preservation is a particularly important consideration in archival research’.32 There could be a certain path dependency at work: if
only material which constructs an issue in a certain way is retained, and this material points to other sources which corroborate this approach, to what extent is such resulting research
systematic and evidence-driven? Some scholars claim that archives have been constructed specifically for a reason: Harvey Brown and Davis-Brown say archives are ‘manufacturers of memory’.33 Other concerns relate to situations in which material contradicts other material.
What should be disregarded? Whose ‘truth’ is it anyway? Is the researcher doomed to cognitive dissonance or doublethink? How many sources are enough to make something reliable? More practically, research using archive work is often set back by delays: it took time to receive accreditation, gain membership, and travel to the physical archives, at which, occasionally, documents had been misplaced or were poorly organised. Extra time was put aside to deal with such instances.
3.4 Conclusion
This chapter has introduced the theoretical and methodological frameworks that underpin the research in question. This thesis is a political-historical study which seeks to explain the development of Conservative Party immigration policy in a critical and thoughtful way. The research is founded on a theoretical framework that is derived from existing models from within both political science and migration studies. This framework has allowed for the research question to be further developed in order to generate three propositions which this thesis will consider. Finally, this section has discussed the mixed method approach which has allowed for the collection of data using semi-structured, elite interviews and document analysis of both archival sources and grey material, as well as memoirs and media sources.
Notes
1 See Deutsch, K. The Nerves of Government: Models of Political Communication and Control. (New York:
The Free Press, 1966). 88. and Haas, E. Beyond the National State. (Stanford: Stanford University, 1964). and Haas, E. When Knowledge is Power: Three Models of Change in International
Organisations. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990). and Bevir, M. The Logic of the History of Ideas. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
2 Bevir, M and Rhodes, R A W. Interpreting British Governance. (London: Routledge, 2003). 13.
3 Wendt, A. Social Theory of International Politics. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). 193.
4 Ibid. 193.
5 Ibid. 193.
6 Ibid. 3.
7 Ibid. 3.
8 Ibid. 312-313.
9 Bevir and Rhodes, 2003, op. cit. 3.
10 Copeland, D. ‘The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism: A Review Essay.’ International Security.
2000. 25(2). 187-212. 210.
11 Bevir and Rhodes, 2003, op. cit. 6.
12 Pierson, P. Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
2004).
13 Gamble, A. The Conservative Nation. (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974). See also Gamble, A. The
Free Economy and the Strong State. (Hampshire: Palgrave, 1994).
14 Blake, R. The Conservative Party from Peel to Major. (London: Faber and Faber, 2011). 257.
15 Ibid. 258.
16 See Bale, T. The Conservatives since 1945: The Drivers of Party Change. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012). 13.
17 See Harmel, R and Janda, K. ‘An integrated theory of party goals and party change.’ Journal of Theoretical
Politics. 1994. 63(3). 259-87. and Harmel, R, Heo, U, Tan, A and Janda, K. ‘Performance, leadership, factions and party change: an empirical analysis.’ West European Politics. 1995. 18(1). 1-33. and Harmel, R and Tan, A. ‘Party actors and party change: does factional dominance matter?’ European Journal of Political Research. 2003. 52. 409-424.
18 See Partos, R and Bale, T. ‘Immigration and asylum policy under Cameron’s Conservatives.’ British Politics.
2015. 10(2). 169-184.
19 Hollifield, J. ‘Immigration Policy in France and Germany. Outputs vs Outcomes’. The Annals. 1986. 485.
113-128.
20 Lewis, M. ‘Asylum: Understanding Public Attitudes’. IPPR. 30 June 2005. ISBN: 1860302734.
21 Lahav, G. ‘Public Opinion Toward Immigration in the European Union: Does it Matter?’ Comparative
Political Studies. 2004. 37(10). 1151-1183. 1176-1177.
22 Thies, C. ‘A Pragmatic Guide to Qualitative Historical Analysis in the Study of International Relations.’
International Studies Perspectives. 2002. 3(4). 351-372. 351.
23 Fontana, A and Frey, J H. ‘The Interview: From Neutral Stance to Political Involvement.’ In. eds. Denzin, N
K and Lincoln, Y S. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. (Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE, 2005). 712.
24 Kvale, S. Doing Interviews. (London: SAGE, 2008). 20.
25 Grix, J. Demystifing Postgraduate Research. (Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press, 2001). 76.
26 See 2010. ‘Secret papers 30-year rule reduced to 20’. BBC News [online] Available at http://bbc.in/9rR2Ol
[accessed 1 June 2012].
27 Kvale, 2008, op. cit. 301.
28 Ibid. 301.
29 Rosenblatt, P C. ‘Interviewing at the Border of Fact and Fiction’. In eds. Gubrium, J F and Holstein, J A.
Handbook of Interview Research. (London: Routledge, 2001). 893-910. 897.
30 Harrison, L. ‘Employing historical and archival resources in political research.’ Political Research: An
Introduction. (London: Routledge, 2001). 124.
31 Finnegan, R. ‘Using documents.’ In eds. Sapsford, R and Jupp, V. Data Collection and Analysis. (London:
SAGE, 1996). 148.
32 Harvey Brown, R and Davis-Brown, B. ‘The making of memory: the politics of archives, libraries and
museums in the construction of national consciousness.’ History of the Human Sciences. 1998: 11(4). 17-32. 22.
- 4 -
1945 to 1964
It would probably be impossible to find […] time for legislation on this subject.1 – Alan Lennox-Boyd
This chapter examines the development of the Conservative Party’s immigration policy from 1945 to 1964, during the period of post-war reconstruction in the UK and the decolonisation of the British Empire. It will first consider the more important changes in the Tories’ approach to immigration. It will then explain the Party’s policy-making using the theoretical framework expanded on previously. Over six general elections and under four different leaders, the Party became gradually concerned by the immigration issue, sought to do something about it, commissioned committees and reports, resolved to let the matter stand, and then, finally, brought in legislation to limit the numbers. In 1955, the Home Secretary told Cabinet that it would be ‘necessary to pass some legislation sooner or later’.2 It was not
until 1962 that migration controls were brought in. By the end of this parliament, the Conservative government had brought in – for the first time – controls on citizens from the Commonwealth. Over a period of 19 years, British immigration laws were transformed from some of the most liberal in the world to some of the most restrictive.
During the immediate post-war period, Conservative Party policy on immigration was non- existent. There was no need for policy: the number of migrants entering the UK was close to insignificant. Efforts made by the Labour government to encourage Commonwealth citizens to fill labour shortages in Britain went unopposed by the Tories. The passing of the 1948 British Nationality Act, then viewed as something of a technicality, and now seen as opening
up settlement in the UK to some 600 million people, received no objections from the Conservative Party. The Tory leadership did not expect that the Act would facilitate