In the hope that it may clear the enforced, recent, 'hoiiday fog' of our brains which may not yet have achieved full functionality, the following is reposted from ScribblingsfromSeaham. In this regard one can but repeat the quotation which forms part of the heading to this site:
To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not a nation of observers.
When a foreign national seeks citizenship/naturalisaton of their host nation, who should make that decision – those of the community in which the applicant lives; or, as in the United Kingdom, a bureaucratic, box-ticking government department?
Recently, in Switzerland, a case concerning a woman who had lived in Switzerland since she was eight, speaks fluent Swiss German, has three children with Swiss passports, has no criminal record, doesn’t claim welfare and is politically active was rejected. On the face of it, one would have thought she would be a ‘shoo-in’ for a Swiss passport. How wrong you are..
Read the article and you will find the reasons why the outcome of her application was rejected. You will also be able to read the comments to the article, among which is mine.
As I wrote, my view is that only those to whom ‘ownership’ of a nation is a ‘given’ should be able to confer citizenship and the benefits that such brings.
Should that not be the case in our nation, the United Kingdom?
Is there not a case made, in this instance, for ‘people power’ – and should not ‘people power’ be able to decide any matter which affects that people’s nation?
What do my readers think?