PDA

View Full Version : british citizen test



somphit
29th Sep 2006, 11:14
My wife took the citizen test on tuesday and she was lucky in getting a pass.The questions were more difficult than she thought, before the test she was learning on computer website www.britishness-test.co.uk (http://www.britishness-test.co.uk) which was good practice but my wife says a word of warning that you still need to read the 3 chapters in book life in the united kingdom has some questions were not covered in website practice tests hope this post might help someone

somphit
29th Sep 2006, 11:14
My wife took the citizen test on tuesday and she was lucky in getting a pass.The questions were more difficult than she thought, before the test she was learning on computer website www.britishness-test.co.uk (http://www.britishness-test.co.uk) which was good practice but my wife says a word of warning that you still need to read the 3 chapters in book life in the united kingdom has some questions were not covered in website practice tests hope this post might help someone

fish
29th Sep 2006, 12:13
Just tried the sample test myself. Only knew two of the five answers guesswork on the others. Good job I don't have to do it. :shrug:

fish
29th Sep 2006, 12:19
I would probably also fail a driving test now if I had to do one again after all these years, as well!

Ian / Rose
29th Sep 2006, 12:22
this citizen test lark is a joke! who in their sain mind instigated it?
I am 49 british born and bread,(deepest Wiltshire) I consider myself to be of an average to high level of education with several GCSE and a couple of A level school qualifications, previously own and managed my own company, and managed seveal others.

I tried this online test myself as mentioned above (www.britishness-test.co.uk) and "FAILED" with a 60%, 3 out of 5 result!!! if i cant pass these simple 5 questions what chase has my misses? I wish I had to sit the exam, and if I failed I would be deported to Thailand.

what comments have the rest of you brits got?

prioritypress
29th Sep 2006, 12:45
Fluked 5/5 in 45 seconds...But I wouldn't say it was easy!!! ;)

http://www.britishness-test.co.uk/exam_result_sample.asp

I think it would be a real struggle for 99% of the UK population!!!

Nick

DG
29th Sep 2006, 13:46
I Just tried it online and failed,
only got 60% 42 yrs old lived here all my life,

I will now have to leave the UK Tomorrow !

I really dont know what my wife will make of it when
that is if she goes for British citizenship which i guess she should - ILR was granted August this year

I say well done to all Thai Wifes & Husbands who have Passed and are now British citizens !

peterinkendal
29th Sep 2006, 13:57
S**t I got all 5 right and don't suppose I'll ever be deported now :(

Peter

Thaddeus
29th Sep 2006, 14:12
Just tried the on-line test.... I failed.

Can someone please tell me why knowing what year women got voting rights has got anything to do with being British?

Another load of .... "err yeh, what I should have said, sorry maam, people are.... what are people, oh yes... please give me another 10 years" .... Blair psychobabble.

I'm so glad I'm not there.

caller
29th Sep 2006, 14:26
Thad,

I guess that one is there for the many women arriving who don't have such rights in their own countries, Muslim women spring to mind from lots of places. It tells them what women have achieved here and what they will have as a consequence!

Which is probably teaching you to suck eggs - not the intention. It might have been easier to say it makes sense to me!

Anyway, I shall now have a go.......

caller
29th Sep 2006, 14:31
Hmmm....40% for me and guess which date I got wrong! Thought I knew that subject as well, but alas, my history O level was a long time ago!

I think the test is crap! ;)

peterinkendal
29th Sep 2006, 14:34
Posted 29 September 2006 22:26

I guess that one is there for the many women arriving who don't have such rights in their own countries

Except these women wouldn't be doing the test - don't you have to be in UK 3 years first?

I imagine that after 3 years if you are committed to the uk then you would have studied some of its history. If you aren't committed then maybe you should not get citizenship.

Peter

caller
29th Sep 2006, 14:47
I imagine that after 3 years if you are committed to the uk then you would have studied some of its history. If you aren't committed then maybe you should not get citizenship.

Peter

Well, I guess the point I am making is that I think its a reasonable question, for the men from such places as well as the women.

Not sure this test demonstrates committment? I passed all of my O levels and I wasn't that committed to achieving that. To me, its more about integration, how you adapt and live your life.

PIK, You may believe that what you have written should apply and I may agree with you, but looking around and reading the news, that doesn't always seem to be the case?

Thaddeus
29th Sep 2006, 14:58
Originally posted by caller:
Hmmm....40% for me and guess which date I got wrong! Thought I knew that subject as well, but alas, my history O level was a long time ago!

I think the test is crap! ;)

I agree with you .... this test is crap (I got 60% btw but still failed)

People are employed and get paid to write this stuff..... why?

Bye bye UK....... sorry.... already did that ;)

John
29th Sep 2006, 15:02
Peterinkendal asked :-


Except these women wouldn't be doing the test - don't you have to be in UK 3 years first?

Actually no, the test can be taken at any time. Logically the time to start studying for the test is after ILR is obtained, after a couple of years in the UK.

That is, be in possession of the pass certificate when the 3rd anniversary of arriving in the UK comes around.

Sawadee khrap
29th Sep 2006, 15:07
Here's my result:

L Sample Test Over!.

Examination Title : Free Sample Test
Date : 29/09/2006
Time : 23:05:23
Total Questions : 5
Duration : 5 Min
Candidate : Guest
Correct Answers : 5
Incorrect Answers : 0
Not Attempted : 0
Marks : 100.00%
Result : Passed
Time Taken : 1 Min 7 Sec

Must be the bottle of vino calapso I've just drunk!!! Can't say as I feel any more "British" now tho'!!!

Sawadee khrap
29th Sep 2006, 15:11
By the way Somphit, congratulations to your wife, I'm sure it was more than thru luck that she passed, sounds like she put a lot of hard work studying onto it. Well done to her :clap:

Donna&Jim
29th Sep 2006, 15:51
John...My husband and I are trying to find a course ESOL/Citizenship. Josiah Masons College had planned a course but have had no applicants!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: and so have cancelled the course.Maybe if we could find enough students they would run the course. Anyone here want to take the course???????please give a me shout :jump:

Marcus
30th Sep 2006, 10:16
I failed.

If I, born in London in 1966, from London/East Anglian stock going back hundreds of years, generally well-informed, good at the language and with a Humanities degree, can't pass - what chance does Dao have?

John
30th Sep 2006, 10:40
But Marcus, it is an exam! People don't (well shouldn't) take an exam without first studying for it ... and I guess you did not study!

So if Dao does study hard before taking the test there is every chance she will pass. This study guide is recommended :-

British Citizenship Test Study Guide (http://www.dexterdirect.com/?gclid=CK69rf6B14ICFUBBEAod3QEbHw)

Marcus
30th Sep 2006, 10:49
True John, very true. But I have spent forty years reading British newspapers, watching British TV, listening to British radio, speaking to British people about Britain and things that concern Britain and generally being interested in the history and culture of Britain.

If it's a test to deterime if someone can become British or not, surely someone like me ought to be able to pass it with ease!

But, yes, time to buy that book (thank you for the link!) and get studying!

(Hey, Dao might even have a try too! :lol:)

John
30th Sep 2006, 11:02
Marcus, let me put it another way.

You clearly speak/listen/read/write English. But if you took GCSE English Language tomorrow, without first studying for that exam, how well do you think you would do? I don't know the answer to that but suspect it can be summed up as .... a lot less well than you would have hoped!

The same applies to the short online Citizenship Test you put yourself through.

It is great that Dao will study for the Citizenship Test, hopefully starting soon. The sooner that test is out of the way, the better. What you want to avoid is Dao's application for Naturalisation being delayed because she has yet to pass the Test.

Marcus
30th Sep 2006, 11:09
Not only are you absolutely right, I've just this minute ordered the book from the link you so kindly provided.

Thanks again mate! :thumb:

Oh, and Somphit, congratulations! :thumb:

Lucky
30th Sep 2006, 11:17
John

As you say it is an exam.

IMHO a total waste of time and totally missing the point.

Th fact that you can pass an exam to become a British citizen is an absolute joke.

Live here, pay taxes, have family fine, but to base it on a what is no more than than a quiz handicapping non fluent English speakers/readers/writers is fundamentally wrong.

Can a dyslexic ever qualify? usfgkaegfaf :confused:

Just about sums up this top heavy bureaucratic regime we live under :mad:

John
30th Sep 2006, 11:46
Lucky posted :-


Th fact that you can pass an exam to become a British citizen is an absolute joke.

Not true. Passing the exam does not make you British. Passing the exam merely entitles you to apply to be British .... which I think is rather different.

Ian / Rose
30th Sep 2006, 12:47
As a moderator John I thought you would have had some sort of idea or reason for understanding how ridicules this test is.

Why should a person who comes to live here be made to take this ridicules test. It does not prove anything; it will never make anyone British. Either you’re born British or your not. As I said on my previous posting back at the top of this thread I failed the test, 2 of the questions I guest the answers.

I am 49 British born and bread, I was until I met my Thai wife prowed to be British but I am not now! This country is full of beurocratic idiots. There is not a government party I would next vote for, only perhaps the raving looneys! The sooner my family and I can move to Thailand the better........ England has too many laws, too many snobs at the top telling us pawns what to do or not do.

When I was at school we used to shout ITS A FREE COUNTRY funny you never hear that said now do we!

peterinkendal
30th Sep 2006, 14:03
Why should a person who comes to live here be made to take this ridicules test. It does not prove anything

With respsect Ian you are wrong on two counts.

Firstly no-one has to take the test in order to live in the UK. With ILR your wife can stay here for as long as she likes without taking the test.

Secondly. Anyone who passes the test has done so as a result of a lot of studying. This shows committment to the cause. Anyone who can't be bothered studying is hardly likely to be prepared to defend these shores. Anything that is difficult to achieve is naturally valued very highly. IMHO the test is designed to do just that.

Which questions did you get wrong?

Peter

John
30th Sep 2006, 14:24
Ian/Rose posted :-


As a moderator John I thought you would have had some sort of idea or reason for understanding how ridicules this test is.

Hmm ... Ian I think you need to appreciate that I did not write the rules! However the need to pass the Citizenship Test, or complete an ESOL/Citizenship course, if someone wants to apply for Naturalisation, is clearly there on the Statute Book.

That that such legislation is ridiculous does not make the requirement go away. I also think it is ridiculous that it is a criminal offence to sell a red squirrel, but hey, I suppose we all have to live with that.

Ian / Rose
30th Sep 2006, 14:45
committment to the cause

Peter you talk a load of twods wallop.

I know my wife can stay here without taking the test. If she does take and pass this test then both my step children automatically also gain their British citizenship which again proves how stupid this system is. They become commitment to the cause for free without taking any test at all! I know there kids but…………!

Taking tests does not prove that you are committed. My wife is more committed than anyone I have ever known. She has no qualifications, she had a limited schooling, but I tell you she is committed. It is not her that wants to be a British citizen it is me that wishes it, and the reason for it is a crazy one. The reason is simply to be able to have the freedom to come and go to European countries without the continued problems of having to keep applying to embassies for visas.

There are tests, licences and taxes for everything here in the UK. You need a licence for everything. You need a qualification for everything. Having a driving licence for instance does not make a driver committed or competent for that matter. Having tests just means you know the answers on that day. You can drive like an idiot the next day!

If I knew that the UK was as bad as it is I would have never tried to bring my wife to live here in the first place. It took the process of me getting my wife and kids here to live in the UK to realise it! When I travelled to Thailand that was the first time I travelled, so I believed what I was taught and told that Britain was Great. It might have been a generation ago, but it sure as hell isn’t Great Britain now!

Another thing is that my wife as you said hasn’t yet proved that she is committed or lives here for the cause but the government has from the day she started working here taken hard earnt money for TAX.

The 2 questions I got wrong were, when did women get the same voting rights as men? And who is the Head of State of the United Kingdom?

To conclude this country and government is racist simply as that.

Ian / Rose
30th Sep 2006, 14:51
Shhhhh John....... how many red squirrel's do you want, i sell those on ebay!

Thaddeus
30th Sep 2006, 17:16
Originally posted by Ian / Rose:

committment to the cause

To conclude this country and government is racist simply as that.
Can't be.... the Bulgarians are coming.

The basic problem with the UK is, the left hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing ;)

(that wasn't a typo)

ash
30th Sep 2006, 23:41
There are tests, licences and taxes for everything here in the UK. You need a licence for everything. You need a qualification for everything.


Try living here you need a licence for fishing(obtained after a 1 year course), hunting sailing , power boating and as for taxes you pay more tax if you have a dog, admit to going to church etc. If you use it you pay.

On the other hand the test content is basically flawed and Peter based on evidence to date very few passing the test or not will defend the shores of the UK.

I did not know the percentage under 19 years err so it makes a difference ??? Oh only to politicians looking for the next vote.

I support language skills 100 percent and would eben suppport basic british living skills e.g Cheque writing but seriously knowing where the goverment thinks Father christmas comes from is not much use.

ash

Ian / Rose
1st Oct 2006, 00:56
Well done Ash good on ya!

Im glad someone on this forum is on the same wavelength as me.

galahad
1st Oct 2006, 01:55
I only got 3/5;so I would have failed also :(
But I can see the validity in the test;for example the wife grammar is better than mine now because shes 'studying' English ...that doesn,t mean she is fluent in English.
On the basis that most tests/exams require some sort of learning/knowledge then it can only be a good thing that our partners 'gain' further knowledge :)
Some of the questions are a bit 'irrelevant'....but when have most exams etc got it right 100% :confused:
I think the test does prove however,that the successful student does have a good understanding of both interpreting the question(English Skills) and general'studied' knowledge.
Maybes my opinion will change after the wifes failed it :p
Personal experiences whether good or bad often reflect peoples opinions on the matter ;)

peterinkendal
1st Oct 2006, 02:44
Originally posted by Ian / Rose:

I know my wife can stay here without taking the test.



So then why did you say not 2 hours earlier




Why should a person who comes to live here be made to take this ridiculous test







Taking tests does not prove that you are committed.



No, it doesn't. But studying hard in order to pass a test does.




My wife is more committed than anyone I have ever known.


Really?

But....



It is not her that wants to be a British citizen it is me that wishes it.

Ah Aaah.

So maybe not that committed?




The reason is simply to be able to have the freedom to come and go to European countries without the continued problems of having to keep applying to embassies for visas.



I see - a real committment to being British then. I would suggest you don't say that on the application form


Having a driving licence for instance does not make a driver committed or competent for that matter. Having tests just means you know the answers on that day.



Twaddle! Passing a driving test shows that you have made the real effort to achieve the right standard. That is why a full licence is valued so highly



If I knew that the UK was as bad as it is I would have never tried to bring my wife to live here in the first place. It took the process of me getting my wife and kids here to live in the UK to realise it!


Nothing is keeping you here. You are here now because at this moment in time it is the best place for you and your family to be. If that were not the case then you would have left already.



To conclude this country and government is racist simply as that.

I think if that were true neither your wife nor mine would even be allowed in the country let alone get a chance to apply for citizenship.

Peter

Marcus
1st Oct 2006, 05:59
Originally posted by Ian / Rose:
There are tests, licences and taxes for everything here in the UK. You need a licence for everything. You need a qualification for everything. Having a driving licence for instance does not make a driver committed or competent for that matter. Having tests just means you know the answers on that day. You can drive like an idiot the next day!

Yes, but that doesn't mean the driving test is a bad idea! If anything, it means the test ought to be tougher - to incorporate night driving and motorway driving and such like.

As for the citizenship test, I know exactly where you are coming from and do have some sympathy. Personally I think questions on the current storyline in 'Emmerdale' would be more relevant to life as a British citizen than questions about obscure bits of history.

But I also have to say that John persuaded me otherwise. Although the test might not be perfect, it shows that the successful candidate worked to get it. And as such it becomes an indication of a real desire to not just live here, but to become fully British.

Okay, I'm sure there are all kinds of issues and problems. I mean, what about people with language difficulties and the like? But fundamentally the test is a good idea. Which is not what I originally thought after I had taken the sample questions and failed!

Ian / Rose
1st Oct 2006, 06:05
Peter,
your not an MP by any chanse are you???? ;)

Noi & Nick
1st Oct 2006, 06:44
Originally posted by Ian / Rose:
The 2 questions I got wrong were, when did women get the same voting rights as men? Fair enough, if you've not studied 20th century history or politics.
And who is the Head of State of the United Kingdom? What????? Ask any Thai who is the Thai head of state and 100% would say the King.

I'm sorry, Ian, but you not knowing the Queen is the UK head of state, plus your very poor standard of written English, is a sad indictment of the education system in this country. Not your fault, of course.

It is not asking people wishing to be British to pass this test that I find amazing or ridiculous; it is the fact that so many people born here couldn't pass it!

Maybe citizenship should be part of the national curriculum in the UK.

Tony & Apple
1st Oct 2006, 07:09
Maybe citizenship should be part of the national curriculum in the UK

it's in schools
schools (http://www.dfes.gov.uk/citizenship/question.cfm?sectionId=13&faqSectionId=0&hierachy=1.13&faqId=6&hidemenu=1#faq)


Citizenship in schools and tests for people wishing to take up UK citizenship in my opinion are all about:

‘Rights & responsibilities’

To appreciate our rights we need to know where they come from also to take responsibility for our actions we need to feel part of a community & be a valued member of it.

Citizenship is part of the battle against social exclusion, which affects our partners.

Noi & Nick
1st Oct 2006, 07:18
Thanks A&A.

With a daughter in year 11, I should have known that. :rolleyes: Doh!!!

Tony & Apple
1st Oct 2006, 07:29
three inter-related components that should run through all education for Citizenship.
Social and moral responsibility:
Pupils learning - from the very beginning - self-confidence and socially and morally responsible behaviour both in and beyond the classroom, towards those in authority and towards each other.


Community involvement:
Pupils learning about becoming helpfully involved in the life and concerns of their neighbourhood and communities, including learning through community involvement and service to the community.


Political literacy:
Pupils learning about the institutions, problems and practices of our democracy and how to make themselves effective in the life of the nation, locally, regionally and nationally through skills and values as well as knowledge - a concept wider than political knowledge alone.


from DfES (http://www.dfes.gov.uk/citizenship/section.cfm?sectionId=3&hierachy=1.3)

BigRed
1st Oct 2006, 08:03
Social and moral responsibility:
Pupils learning - from the very beginning - self-confidence and socially and morally responsible behaviour both in and beyond the classroom, towards those in authority and towards each other.


Community involvement:
Pupils learning about becoming helpfully involved in the life and concerns of their neighbourhood and communities, including learning through community involvement and service to the community.

There must be a high failure rate around our way :bah:

BigRed

Mark W
1st Oct 2006, 09:23
Posted by Ian / Rose

If I knew that the UK was as bad as it is I would have never tried to bring my wife to live here in the first place. It took the process of me getting my wife and kids here to live in the UK to realise it! When I travelled to Thailand that was the first time I travelled, so I believed what I was taught and told that Britain was Great. It might have been a generation ago, but it sure as hell isn’t Great Britain now!

To conclude this country and government is racist simply as that.

At least your wife can get citizenship and a British passport. It's alot harder for you to do the same in Thailand.

Grahame
1st Oct 2006, 10:18
God knows how!!! I got 5/5 in 5 mins exactly but wasnt sure about three of the five questions (which were a complete guess)..... I don't know how the hell Thai's who have been in the UK 2-3yrs can pass this!!

My ex-wife has tried once already, I went with her to the test centre and it was bloody hard! She studied for 2 months using the books that are recommended.... but still failed miserably...

Good luck to all trying to pass! Does anyone know if there is a Thai translation of the text book available yet? I seem to remember someone asked some months ago? I think it was Ash?

Cheers

sureerat9
1st Oct 2006, 13:28
just had a knock at the test 4 out of 5 not good
:help:

mellowsailor
2nd Oct 2006, 04:37
I consider myself reasonably well-educated, and take an interest in current affairs. I only got 3 out of 5, because I thought the suffragette thing had come to a head in 1918, and I don't give a stuff about the EU, so I got that wrong as well. It does call into question, as a previous post has said, why so many "native" Brits can't pass the test, although I would like to think I would if I studied for it.
More to the point is that my dear wife, who has lived in this country for 14 years, wouldn't have a hope in hell of passing it, because she lacks confidence in her English and freezes at the sight of any form or document. Her previous husband treated her abominably and she retreated into the comfort zone of the Thai community for a long time. I helped her to get British citizenship a couple of years ago, before the current requirements were in place. She lost one job opportunity because she couldn't complete a test paper which was mostly simple maths questions dressed up as little problems. She brought the paper home, and a short while later showed it to me completed with all the correct answers. Now she has had a full-time job for several months and her confidence has grown in leaps and bounds.
So I think she is the living example of the need for some sort of test, but it should be heavily language-based rather than "fact"-based. If you can't read and write, you haven't a chance of assimilating into the life of this country.
You can't get Thai citizenship without passing a language test, can you?

peterinkendal
2nd Oct 2006, 08:08
I thought the suffragette thing had come to a head in 1918,

It did, that is I believe when women first got votes, but they had to be older than men.....equal rights was later. (Trick question?)

Peter

iancanton
2nd Oct 2006, 09:33
the fact that many people apply for a uk passport simply for the convenience it provides is all the more reason for the uk government to use a test to weed them out and i fully support the government in this.

my main quibble is that the questions ought to be relevant, like the city and head of state questions. the answers to two of the other three questions are just trivia of which most uk citizens are unaware and are of no use whatever in our everyday lives. to understand the questions and answer them already requires, completely justifiably, a reasonable amount of english language skill and i therefore do not favour further language tests for the sole purpose of citizenship. it also must be said that the official answers need to be factually correct, so that people are not failed in error.

incidentally, i scored 4 out of 5, with the eu question catching me out.

ian. :)

IanB
2nd Oct 2006, 16:56
Marcus,


I failed the sample test and yet I would challenge anyone here to suggest that either my level of English or my knowledge and awareness of British history and culture is a travesty (again, of what?) or something for which I ought to be ashamed.

I suggest that your knowledge and awareness of British history and culture is a travesty and something for which you ought to be ashamed.

Next challenge? :D


Seriously, though, this is why the government is introducing citizenship lessons in schools. Most British people lack basic knowledge about how the country works, and I think that explains a lot of things from yob culture to ignorant comments about the EU.

Ian

ash
2nd Oct 2006, 21:27
the fact that many people apply for a uk passport simply for the convenience it provides is all the more reason for the uk government to use a test to weed them out and i fully support the government in this


You mean the convienience of being able to live with ones family in the UK and travel with ones family in Europe. Also the convienience of being able to stay in the UK if the spouse dies so that the kids can carry on in school etc. Thats perfectly reasonable and weeding those applicants out benefits no one.

Oh add the convienience of being able to vote, most other major benefits are available to those with ILR or seeking asylum anyway.

As to Ianbs comments about not understanding how the country works I agree in part but get real understanding miracles is gods job, and extracting the truth from the massive amounts of spin and bovine excrement in the media would require more than 1 lifetime.

However if people feel that the test is so wonderful maybe they should be forced to take the test when they next renew the passport.
ash

Noi & Nick
3rd Oct 2006, 00:06
Originally posted by ash:
However if people feel that the test is so wonderful maybe they should be forced to take the test when they next renew the passport.
ash Excellent idea. Even better, make everyone take the test before allowing them to vote.

I'm not joking. If people want all the rights of being a citizen then I strongly feel that they should be aware of and accept the responsibilities that go with it. Whether they are an immigrant or were born here.

ash
3rd Oct 2006, 00:13
If people want all the rights of being a citizen Nick ! but your a British subject not a citizen :confused: the UK does not have a constitution nor a bill of rights.

ash

Noi & Nick
3rd Oct 2006, 00:29
Originally posted by Ash:
Nick ! but your a British subject not a citizen 'Fraid not, Ash.

On 1 January 1983, upon the coming into force of the British Nationality Act 1981, every Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies became either a British Citizen, British Dependent Territories Citizen or British Overseas Citizen. The use of the term "British subject" was discontinued.

(Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject))

ash
3rd Oct 2006, 00:45
"Every applicant will be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown and make a pledge to uphold the values and laws of the UK."

Sounds like subject to me but of course now "your her Majesties subject" from your source.

My main point stands no constitution and no bill of rights.
ash

Noi & Nick
3rd Oct 2006, 01:02
Originally posted by ash:
My main point stands no constitution and no bill of rights.
ash No written constitution; no written Bill of Rights.

For an overview, I refer you, again, to Wikipedia; Constitution of the United Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom)

Some interesting arguments for and against a written constitution can be found here (http://www.thinkhistory.btinternet.co.uk/shouldtheukhaveawrittenconstitution.htm).

The oath of allegiance question has come up before. New citizens are not swearing, or affirming, their personal allegiance to the Queen, rather their allegiance to her in her role as head of state. The oath and affirmation both contain the words "her heirs and successors" which could be a king or president or whatever, should the UK change from a parliamentary democracy to a republic or something else.

Marcus
3rd Oct 2006, 01:21
Originally posted by IanB:
I suggest that your knowledge and awareness of British history and culture is a travesty and something for which you ought to be ashamed.

Next challenge? :D

:lol: :thumb:

IanB
3rd Oct 2006, 07:25
"Every applicant will be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown and make a pledge to uphold the values and laws of the UK."

'fraid I'd fail on that one - I would not swear an oath of allegiance to an unelected head of state.

Ian

Lucky
3rd Oct 2006, 07:44
Not sure if I'd swear one to elected one either :(

iancanton
3rd Oct 2006, 08:11
ash

i mean primarily the freedom to live and work anywhere in the eu, plus the benefits of visa-free travel in many overseas countries. in the special case where a single parent of school-age children feels no particular affinity for his country of residence, there are compassionate grounds for permitting him or her to remain with the children, without issuing a uk passport. uk citizenship is devalued if we give it to people who despise virtually everything for which it stands and, other than perhaps being married to a uk citizen, remain here only for mercenary reasons.

ian. :)

IanB
3rd Oct 2006, 08:32
uk citizenship is devalued if we give it to people who despise virtually everything for which it stands and, other than perhaps being married to a uk citizen, remain here only for mercenary reasons.

Depends on how you look at it. In my view, the fact that so many people WANT British Citizenship AND the fact that we are a relatively generous country in this respect, increases my pride in being British and improves the value that I perceive in citizenship!

Ian

Thaddeus
3rd Oct 2006, 08:55
Originally posted by IanB:

uk citizenship is devalued if we give it to people who despise virtually everything for which it stands and, other than perhaps being married to a uk citizen, remain here only for mercenary reasons.

Depends on how you look at it. In my view, the fact that so many people WANT British Citizenship AND the fact that we are a relatively generous country in this respect, increases my pride in being British and improves the value that I perceive in citizenship!

Ian

On the other side of the coin.

The fact that so many people want British citizenship who aren't British, have had little or no contact with Britain explains the bit after the last fully capitalised word.

Britain is a soft touch.

I, personally, am not proud of being British.... haven't been for a while.

Marcus
3rd Oct 2006, 10:32
Originally posted by ash:

the fact that many people apply for a uk passport simply for the convenience it provides is all the more reason for the uk government to use a test to weed them out and i fully support the government in this


You mean the convienience of being able to live with ones family in the UK and travel with ones family in Europe. Also the convienience of being able to stay in the UK if the spouse dies so that the kids can carry on in school etc. Thats perfectly reasonable and weeding those applicants out benefits no one.

Yes, well said Ash!

Dao is going to work for citizenship. Why? It's not because she's particularly in love with Britain! It's because her husband (me!) is British, her son is British and she wants to have the security of always knowing she can be with her child and family.

And the fact that she'll somehow study enough to get through this test in order to gain that security is an inspiration to me.

Noi & Nick
3rd Oct 2006, 11:55
Originally posted by IanB:

"Every applicant will be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown and make a pledge to uphold the values and laws of the UK."

'fraid I'd fail on that one - I would not swear an oath of allegiance to an unelected head of state.

Ian Ian, you would not be swearing allegiance to an unelected head of state, you would be swearing allegiance to the state, as represented by the head of state who, in the UK, is the monarch. As I said earlier
New citizens are not swearing, or affirming, their personal allegiance to the Queen, rather their allegiance to her in her role as head of state. The oath and affirmation both contain the words "her heirs and successors" which could be a king or president or whatever, should the UK change from a parliamentary democracy to a republic or something else.

caller
3rd Oct 2006, 12:56
However if people feel that the test is so wonderful maybe they should be forced to take the test when they next renew the passport.
ash

Nah, before they conceive is more appropriate! :D

ash
3rd Oct 2006, 21:10
quote:
New citizens are not swearing, or affirming, their personal allegiance to the Queen, rather their allegiance to her in her role as head of state. The oath and affirmation both contain the words "her heirs and successors" which could be a king or president or whatever, should the UK change from a parliamentary democracy to a republic or something else.


The oath is to the crown which implies a monarchy if the uk changes to a republic then something else would be required. There is also the point that we do not have a constitution as unless something is written down it does not exist.

ash

Noi & Nick
3rd Oct 2006, 23:56
The American oath begins I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America....... Americans are not pledging allegiance to a bit of cloth! :crazy: They are, as the pledge says, pledging allegiance to the republic for which it stands.

The same with the UK oath. One is swearing allegiance to the state, as represented by the crown. If the UK were to change to a republic, then doubtless the oath would be altered to reflect this.
There is also the point that we do not have a constitution as unless something is written down it does not exist. The UK does have a constitution. It is not written down in one particular document, but it does exist. It is written down in numerous documents, various statutes, laws etc. all the way back to Magna Carta.

Still, if one doesn't want to do so, then nobody is forcing anyone to become British. Naturalisation is an option; it's not compulsory. If people who are born British find having a monarch as head of state and not having a written constitution so unbearable, they can always renounce their British citizenship.

ash
4th Oct 2006, 00:24
The same with the UK oath. One is swearing allegiance to the state, as represented by the crown. If the UK were to change to a republic, then doubtless the oath would be altered to reflect this.


In which case it would be a new oath and the old one would no longer be binding.


The UK does have a constitution. It is not written down in one particular document, but it does exist.

Therefore by definition we do not have a constitution.
ash

-Keith-
4th Oct 2006, 00:33
:sleep:

Noi & Nick
4th Oct 2006, 00:34
Originally posted by ash:
In which case it would be a new oath Exactly.
the old one would no longer be binding. It would still be binding as the current oath contains the words her heirs and successors.

The UK does have a constitution. It is not written down in one particular document, but it does exist. Therefore by definition we do not have a constitution. We do, as explained before.

Up to you if you wont accept that fact. :shrug:

-Keith-
4th Oct 2006, 00:36
:sleep: :sleep:

Noi & Nick
4th Oct 2006, 00:39
Keith, perhaps you should take advantage of the new "hide post" feature. :D ;)

ash
4th Oct 2006, 01:28
It would still be binding as the current oath contains the words her heirs and successors.

Bovine !! if there is a coup tomorrow or as in Vichy France a puppet goverment is installed you really think it would still be binding.

ash

Noi & Nick
4th Oct 2006, 01:45
If a change of government came about as per your suggestions, or similar, then that government would not be legitimate. Therefore any allegiance under the oath would belong to the previous legitimate government that had been overthrown.

ash
4th Oct 2006, 02:11
If a change of government came about as per your suggestions, or similar, then that government would not be legitimate. Therefore any allegiance under the oath would belong to the previous legitimate government that had been overthrown.


So the current thai goverment is illegal then ?

maokaang
4th Oct 2006, 02:12
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

It doesn't answer the silly arguments coming from either side, I just thought it would be fun to throw it in. ;)

Tobias
4th Oct 2006, 02:19
The "Oath" would remain binding, at least to the extent of what is represented when an individual takes it - however 'a President' could not be considered as a 'heir or successor' should we get one in the future. The law would need to be changed and a new oath of allegiance established.

I'm sure we've had a long debate here before on what this Oath is about and what the monarchy represents both in this context and in law.

Noi & Nick
4th Oct 2006, 03:53
Originally posted by ash:
So the current thai goverment is illegal then ? I studied the British constitution for several years whilst studying for several public service exams. I have also attempted to update and refresh my knowledge from various sources. I have not, however, studied the Thai constitution. Therefore I cannot answer your question.

I can offer an opinion, and that is that the current Thai government is not legitimate. But that is only my opinion, and so worth no more nor less than any one else's.

ash
4th Oct 2006, 05:47
The oath of allegiance question has come up before. New citizens are not swearing, or affirming, their personal allegiance to the Queen, rather their allegiance to her in her role as head of state. The oath and affirmation both contain the words "her heirs and successors" which could be a king or president or whatever, should the UK change from a parliamentary democracy to a republic or something else.

As Toby say's "heirs and successors" cannot be a president or whatever B- :clap:

Thaddeus
4th Oct 2006, 07:39
Originally posted by ash:

If a change of government came about as per your suggestions, or similar, then that government would not be legitimate. Therefore any allegiance under the oath would belong to the previous legitimate government that had been overthrown.


So the current thai goverment is illegal then ?

The jury is still out on that one.... but seeing that they are the jury...... I'm saying nothing ;)

Except this......

Compare a country that allows you to enter and make it incredibly difficult to make you leave, and then make you study for a few hours and take a silly little test that proves you know more about certain aspects of English history than those around you.

With, a country that can just change the rules overnight.

You are very very lucky.

Noi & Nick
4th Oct 2006, 13:21
Originally posted by ash:


The oath of allegiance question has come up before. New citizens are not swearing, or affirming, their personal allegiance to the Queen, rather their allegiance to her in her role as head of state. The oath and affirmation both contain the words "her heirs and successors" which could be a king or president or whatever, should the UK change from a parliamentary democracy to a republic or something else.

As Toby say's "heirs and successors" cannot be a president or whatever B- :clap: What Tobias says seems to confirm what I posted at 07:56
One is swearing allegiance to the state, as represented by the crown. If the UK were to change to a republic, then doubtless the oath would be altered to reflect this. He also says
The "Oath" would remain binding, at least to the extent of what is represented when an individual takes it which, again, seems to confirm what I have been saying.

Tobias, apologies if I have misinterpreted your remarks, in which case I would be grateful if you could take the time and trouble to correct my interpretation.