Why doesn’t it say ‘Commonwealth’ on my passport?
Posted by AlexT - 05/08/09 at 10:08 am
It used to be that travelling through the Commonwealth was quick and easy.
In Canada in the 1960s the Commonwealth was shown on world maps and my passport was marked with ‘British Subject’ alongside ‘Canadian Citizen’.
When I visited the UK in 1971 there were three queues at the airport UK passports, Commonwealth passports and All Other passports.
That all came to an end in 1973 when the UK joined the then EEC, now EU.
Now when I travel to the UK, people from countries with no historical ties speed through quicker than Canadians and Australians who share the Queen as head of state! It’s an outrage.
Citizens of the EU can also stay and get jobs, while I cannot. I am luckier than some other Commonwealth visitors that I do not need a visa to visit the UK, while many others do. People today say ‘what is the point of even having a Commonwealth if it carries no privileges for ordinary people when travelling among its member countries?’ It is on this personal level that the Commonwealth is losing its relevance.
This article was written by James Alcock. Do you agree with his viewpoint? Should the Commonwealth ease mobility between its members?
Category : Mobility & Exchange, My Commonwealth, homepage items
Tags: Canada, Passports
Stay Updated : 
RSS 2.0 feed.
August 6th, 2009 at 5:33 am
I think the main problem remain as being the huge gap in terms of economic, politics and military between the Cth countries. For eg. if UK allows entry without requiring a visa to everyone from the Cth countries than there will be a large flows of people from relatively poor and politically unstable countries coming to the developed countries for the searh of better livelihood. And thus, multiple problems might arise such as dealing with migrant workers, asylum seekers, refugees, students etc and providing them shelter, food, social benifits which some of the countries might not be afforded. And if such things going on, targetted countris might face the charges of abusing the fundamental rights of asylum seekers, migrant workers, refugees etc for not complying with the international human rights standards if the coutries in question are parties to the international convention/treaties. What I would like to suggest is Cth should provide adequate funds and assistance to the developing and least developed countris in order to achieve the minimum standard of living and to keep the law and order, if not fully, at least in tolarable level.
August 6th, 2009 at 8:51 am
This is a problem partly of national policy. This is not the forum to debate the marits of the EU, but the difficulty demonstrated here is how member states have drifted away from the Commonwealth to insular, protectionist regional blocs like the EU, but also the AU, and the analogous organisations in North America and South-East Asia.
There is nothing the Commonwealth can, or should do to prevent Member states from following whatever foreign policy they wish. But this increasing regionalisation is something which must be discussed at the November CHOGM. All of us have our own views on said regionalisation, and all Commonwealth states, it seems, are guilty of it. In part, it is probably due to the fact that Britain no longer functions as a maritime trade hub for the Commonwealth and no other country has stepped into the gap. Hence, it is no longer viable to trade long-distance, and economic unions develop into political unions…
Short of establishing a Commonwealth merchant navy (not an idea without its merits)there does not seem to be a way out of this.
But Mong Marma’s point about development is equally as valid. It is easy for the richer Commonwealth realms tocomplain about bad service, as valid as those complaints are, but in truth none of those realms would be happy to open their doors to the thousands of Africans and Asians who would make use of the free passage these days, especially when Britain already has an immigration problem.
No, the Commonwealth can open the doors of travel again, but only when there is an equal quality of life for all its citizens. It would be dgreat if all Commonwealth citizens could once again claim to be British subjects, but would they want to be? For travel purposes, at least, it would be good.
So yes, development first, then free passage. But we should definitely aim for free passage… as far as I know various NGOs are always giving estimates of how much money and time it would take to eradicate world poverty… If the Commonwealth has a whip-round by and for member states it might take even less time.
Then again, that’s probably the subject of every CHOGM.
August 9th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I think that when countries were given independence it was more like a
divorce. And to some extent a sour one, in Uganda, Thousands of
excited crowds kept vigil in Kampala as the blue, white and red Union
Jack of the colonial powers went down and in its place, the black,
yellow and red stripped flag was placed to identify a newly
independent Uganda.
The passport is what we use today to show identity and belonging. I am
first a Ugandan then a commonwealth citizen and I like the idea that
my passport has Uganda and the coat of arms.
I do not want to be treated differently, I just want to be respected and given equal opportunities to play my part.
I do not want to get into the United Kingdom freely, get a job and stay. I want to be able to get what i would get in the UK in my home country. For me that is more important than having a commonwealth passport
August 10th, 2009 at 6:02 am
Good point Alex. I like to see my passport with the Bangladeshi map as well. But how would you persuade the Cth in a case where people like refugee or asylum seeker or stateless person who have left their countries because of the political turmail or fear of to be percecuted by the govt of different political views…people who are desperately in deed of protection and shelter, which is a common scenario now in some of the member states such as Pakistan, Srilankai….Can Cth enfore other member states to accept those people without putting loads of legal burdens to prove them that they are really in need of protection? or Does Cth really care about those people? I don’t think so…there are still hundreds of thousands of peopole who have to flee their own countris because of internal conflict in their home countries or any other reasons that lead them to flee……. what can Cth do in this regards? conflict seems to be a reality in this complex world…therefore, increasing numbers of refugees and asylum seekers are also reality…but the conditons of the refugees’ camp is the harshest reality…and most of the govt policies seem to be reluctant to address their problems properly even if the countries are parties to the UN conventions relating to the refugees issues.
August 10th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Murangira’s comment raises an issue here.
There is still the implication that the Commonwealth is a post-colonial organisation… and more importantly the implication that this is a bad thing.
The Commonwealth doesn’t seem to fight this. Or tackle it head-on in any way. Yes, the Commonwealth in its current form consists of former British Colonies. That’s the history. Pretending otherwise is just a waste of everyone’s time. Pretending the Commonwealth is divorced from this history is self-evidently false, but similarly, we should, as commonwealth citizens, be proud that the organisation has come such a long way from its roots… it’s a diplomatic organisation of equals, with their own cultures, whose history is indeed linked together by an Imperial past, but who have since (I hope) moved on from the petty colonial (and anti-colonial) sentiments of the mid-twentieth century.
It’s great that Uganda has its own coat of arms on its passport. That’s the way it should remain for all member states. But the Commonwealth really needs to push this aspect of its existence: the fact that we are a family of nations – borders drawn by the British Empire, often bloody conflicts both for and against said Empire in the region, and coming out the stronger for it.
The Empire existed. It was true. It brought us all together, and the Commonwealth of Nations is almost the realisation of the Imperial dream of the 1920s – equal self-governing states who can work together for shared principles. Where did those principles come from? The Educated people of the Commonwealth. Where did that education come from? You tell me.
History; true, unadulterated Commonwealth history, with all the horror and the glory as well, should be taught a general curriculum throughout member states. How else are we going to justify the organisation with this mighty Imperial elephant in the room?
August 19th, 2009 at 12:27 am
The idea of Commonwealth Members not having access to the other Commonwealth countries on different levels does seem like something that needs to be addressed.
For example, if I wished to join the British Army as an officer (As I do ), as a citizen of Canada I would be required to reside in the United Kingdom for 5 years to get a British citizenship!
Considering the close historic ties between Canada and the United Kingdom, this is absurd! Why should I, a Canadian of all things, of strong British Heritage, be forced to live 5 years in the UK as if I were a Frenchman, or Spaniard, or Germany? Oh right, they likely don’t have to anymore…
Forgive me if I am getting a bit worked up about the issue, I don’t intend to sound like a sourpuss, but the Commonwealth is something extremely close to my heart, my country, not to mention the entire world, owes a tremendous amount to the British Commonwealth, and I am very proud of our joint history, of the spread of democracy because of our efforts, and the formation of our own brand of society.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:38 am
I agree with this article. I find it frustrating that Europeans can enter the UK more easily than my Commonwealth cousins, even though I have more in common (in terms of culture, language, music, film, tv, history) with someone my age from Canada than say, France.
It’s nice to see that recently we all finally made our voices clear in the EU elections, and voted a large number anti-european MPs to Brussels. Political pundits put this down as a mere knee-jerk reaction to the economic climate. But honestly, its because we’ve been frustrated for decades, and now we’re saying so in the voting booth.
I hope one day it says Commonwealth, not European Union on my passport.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:14 am
I also think it should be easier for Commonwealth Citizens to travel to each others countries. I tried joining the British Air force the other day and was told that though I graduated from a US University I would not be able to apply for an Officer Position. I didn’t understand this.
September 26th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Dear, oh, dear, how many times have I heard these arguments before? It’s always ‘ex-colonials’ who demand special treatment in the UK, never the other way round.
I have no sympathy at all. When I have visited Australia and New Zealand on a British passport, I have been classified as a foreign national. I have no problem with that – but why do Aussies and Kiwis always bitch and whine about it when the UK treats them that way? If I did that in their countries, they’d call me a whingeing pom!
In fact, the UK doesn’t even treat its own citizens as its own people – for example, I was considered an overseas student by UK universities, because my family had been living abroad. (That wasn’t my fault – I didn’t choose to leave the UK.)
A better solution would be bilateral Free Immigration Agreements, similar to the arrangement that has existed between Australia and New Zealand. Although more New Zealanders take advantage of it than Australians, it is still reciprocal. Unlike the UK’s working holidaymaker scheme.
Chevon, do you mean UK or US? – the US isn’t a Commonwealth country.
October 5th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Not only should Great Britain allow Commonwealth citizens preferential treatment over the Europeans, but this should be a commonwealth wide policy ie applied in Austrailian, Canadian, Indian airports etc. That we treat Commonwealth citizens worse than europeans who we share no historical ties with, and in many cases fought wars against is disgraceful especially as our Allies in these wars were none other than the commonwealth nations of today.
October 6th, 2009 at 5:34 am
For Canada to have a more open border with some the member countries is just not realistic given the economic/democratic disparities. I’m sure the same applies to countries like Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:47 pm
I don’t think it’s asking for special treatment as immigration will still have to do their jobs at screening. To go back to the original post, I think it would be beneficial for all commonwealth country to have a commonwealth citizen bloc for going through immigration. If done right, it would be similar to the Canada/US fasttrack to allow easier passage.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:01 am
Ken, I don’t think it’s wrong that the ‘ex-colonials’ (Canadians, New Zealanders, Australians) as you call us, would like special treatment. And also there should be similar special treatment given to British nationals in travelling, working or emigrating to Canada, NZ or Australia. Why not?
As an Australian, I think it’s unfortunate that you are classified as a foreign national when coming here, and I will definately bitch and moan that I am scrutinised as a foreigner at UK ports of entry while EU nationals walk on by.
But how did this unfortunate situation develop? Up until the 1970′s, British nationals could easily get into Australia.
In the early 70′s the UK introduced the Immigration Act (1971) which made the rules more restrictive for Commonwealth citizens. Fair enough, it was understandable. Britain was getting too many immigrants and the government was manoeuvring to join the EEC so they were distancing themselves from the Commonwealth.
But when the Australian and New Zealand governments pointed out that the new restrictive laws shouldn’t apply to NZ, Australia and Canada because of our British ancestry, the British government said it would look discriminatory against the non-white Commonwealth citizens. So we were locked out of Britain, & as a result Australia, NZ and Canada introduced similarly restrictive laws.
As much as I love Britain, I have to say it was the short sighted policies of the British pollies and civil servants that created this situation where our governments treat each other’s citizens as foreign nationals.
But you are right about the solution. New Zealand and Australia have a great arrangement where we can live, work and travel freely in both countries. My niece has just returned to Australia from living in NZ for several years under that agreement, & is about to go to Canada to live and work (she is under 30 & is taking advantage of the work permit arrangements that exist between Commonwealth countries).
It would be great for Britain, Canada, New Zealand and Australia to have a similar agreement that existed for all ages to live, work and travel freely.
This arrangement used to exist when Canadians, New Zealanders and Australians were all British subjects too. The restrictive policies are all of fairly recent origin.
December 1st, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I had an experience a few years ago when my son applied for a Canadian Visa and was refused even though my father is a Canadian citizen and we are citizens of a commonwealth nation. I paid a great sum of money and none was returned. i am sure with the word commonwealth citizen on my passport there is no guarantee I will be accepted in any commonwealth country. This leave the matter of relevance of the commonwealth open for discussion.
December 2nd, 2009 at 3:27 pm
I think that it is premature for a freely available Commonwealth Passport currently, but it would have merit from a Commonwealth Secretariat perspective, with people able to apply to the Secretariat for a passport that enable their diplomats and NGO’s entry without pre-arranged visas.
The more pragmatic and more correct question is about free-trade within the Commonwealth. For as a trading bloc, in the ANZ-CER spirit, the Commonwealth can achieve this, because this will improve standards of living and economic performance and economic opportunity for Commonwealth citizens throughout our world, not only just within the Commonwealth, as comparative advantages will be found for many industries and built upon.
Only then can immigration can be dealt with a parable furthering the basis of a Commonwealth passport than currently possible, for without elevating the Citizenry’s parity to as close as practicable, we leave people behind and condemn ourselves to being spoken ill of.
Get the Commonwealth engaged as an economic bloc of free trade, circumscribing the WTO and surpassing the need for bi-lateral free trade agreements, then the Commonwealth will become something even greater and more worthy for Anglophone Nations and Countries to join.
December 19th, 2009 at 2:29 am
Perhaps this is another area where the looses association that is the Commonwealth needs to come closer together like the EU.
December 26th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Reading some of these comments has me worryied as i am a australia born to a mother who is english and who as lived in australia since 1963 shes moving back to england to lve and i am going back with her not only as a son but as her carer as well sounds like i am going to go through hell and back with passports and renewing my right of abode before i get there but i must go with her cos she needs needs me so i think that for someone in my suituation a commonwealth passport is a great stress free way of being able to go with here.
December 28th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
There are so many issues expressed in the replies and each of them are valid to a point as regards their own country’s status.
I believe that all Commonwealth countries should have ‘a member of the Commonwealth’ stamped on their passports and not have to arrive and join a queue as foreign nationals. This of course, has other implications as well and as member commonwealth countries they should make it a priority to put policies in place to ensure this happens
Leonie Lawson
Vice President
Royal Commonwealth Society – Auckland, NZ
December 31st, 2009 at 5:36 am
In true Canadian sprit I am sure that we could come to a compromise I agree that we have no right to demand anything of anyone, however I all so understand that from a “ex-colonialist” point of view, some respect for our sacrifices has a colony from the UK would be appreciated, at the same time concessions should be made for those travelling from the “motherland” to the “ex-colonies” I think that if the countries got together and decided that yes everyone would be members but only those who meet a certain quota economically, would be able to enjoy certain privileges. Much like the EU there are countries in Europe that are “European” by title yet do not meet the necessary requirements to become full members. What I am saying is a compromise by setting quotas on the eligibility of who can join. We therefore limit the risk of mass immigration to the UK and Canada and Australia and New Zealand. Seeing has all four of these countries would qualify everyone in the masses would be satisfied has havening “Commonwealth Citizen” stamped on their passport and those in development would be giving incentive to get their act together. So far I can’t see a down side for the masses. Who’s with me!
January 2nd, 2010 at 1:36 am
Hmm Patrick wants to become a chattel of the Commonwealth eh? Dont ya know the Commonwelath of Australia is in fact a corporation…why would anyone want to become a “citizen, beneficiary” of a corporation having its origins in the Corporate City of London…and the blind shall be led by the blind!!!
January 11th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
I’d rather be the devils right hand, than in his path. Ps I don’t care about the Commonwealth of Australia, my little republican, I care about the commonwealth of Canada one, number two this post is about ways of finding compromises to allow commonwealth citizens to have certain privileges for our common origins. If you don’t have anything constructive to say with all due respect go find a blog that better expresses your views.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
I fully agree with Andrew, who laments the loss of the historic ties between our nations.
As a Brit, I think the policies of my country’s governments throughout the late 20th Century and onwards have been scandalous. Unless we change our political direction soon, the 20th Century will become known as the one in which we abandoned 500 years of history and our cultural ties of kinship.
It’s not so long ago that the Commonwealth was viewed with the deepest affection among the British public, and I find it awful that so few people these days even know what it is and does. We are all a big family, really, and we would do well to remember that fact.
With regards the UK’s immigration policy, undoubtedly we do have a problem with immigration. The British Isles simply isn’t blessed with enough space for 70 million, and with current trends it won’t be long before that is hit. However, applying limits to immigration shouldn’t mean turning our backs on the Commonwealth. By all means, we should be encouraging immigration to come predominantly from countries we have ties with, rather than European nations and others with whom we have no shared history, culture or values.
Despite the insistence of my government, I am a Commonwealth citizen, not a European one.
January 15th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
I understand that Britain’s membership of a continental common market does require certain restrictions on trade with Commonwealth states outside the EU, but I see no reason for the frustratingly tight restrictions on movement between the UK, Canada, Australia & New Zealand. Obviously with widely disparate standards of living migration fears would prevent complete freedom of movement for all Commonwealth citizens, but I see no reason why the developed states couldn’t agree to free movement for their citizens.
The Commonwealth does matter to me, it’s about friendship and culture and history and even family: It’s difficult to think of Aussies, Canadians and Kiwis as being ‘foreign’. As a Brit I feel that having to jump through hoops to move to another English speaking country, where I have family, who’s laws are similar, structure of government near identical and who’s head of state happens to be the same person as mine, to be apparently ridiculous.
I welcomed free movement between the EU states and find being an EU citizen a good idea, but it is just as important that Commonwealth citizenship be recognised in the same way. If the Commonwealth is to matter it has to be relevant to its people: It doesn’t seem relevant when I can’t even travel.
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:46 pm
I would agree that for travel, things between commonwealth countries should be far easier than what they are. This need not be a problem of immigration, being fast tracked through customs in any other commonwealth country is only proper. If implemented properly, this would not give any right to remain, just to visit.
With the forth coming elections in the UK, it is a debate that should really be pushed on those that wish to be elected, not only by the UK electorate, but all citizens of the Commonwealth as well.
April 12th, 2010 at 3:07 am
As a Canadian living in the UK (thanks to ancestry) I find it tragicomic that Britain has been struggling with what it means to be “British” – especially in the context of Scottish (and to a lesser extent Welsh) independence. In 1973, you chose to abandon your (now grown-up) children (esp. Canada, Australia, New Zealand) in order to cosy up to your neighbours (EU) for economic reasons. It is very sad to move home and find “mom and dad” thinking of a divorce – especially after all your kids have done for you (Gallipoli, Battle of Britain, Normandy etc.). No wonder you are having an identity crisis – who in your situation wouldn’t?
July 5th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
can i be granted a british passport if i was born before 1962 in a former british colony. i son’t want to live and work just travel hassle free.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
It should go back to how it was in 1971, for the Commonwealth to regain its status and move on into the future.
November 7th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
I’m a Canadian who has lived in the UK for over 18 years. I have right of abode through my mother,who was an English warbride. My dad was a Canadian but his family were English, and all 4 grandparents were British Citizens.
Should be all right for me,eh? Believe it or not, I am,for the first time,having hassles at the UK borders! Not only have they now changed the process for obtaining ROA ( now it’s reapply everytime and pay a staggering £400. each time!)but they don’t seem to have informed immigration STAFF about its change in appearance.I came home from holiday the other night and as normal opened my passport to the ROA page; the immigration officer glared at me and barked ‘where’s your landing card.’ I said, ‘but I live here! I’ve never had to fill out one before.” Anyway he made me start filling one out,and the questions of course were totally irrelevant to me,such as ‘purpose of visit’ and so on.Then he suddenly stopped me (I suspect he realised he’d made an error) and took the unfinished card (which I also suspect went straight in the bin!), put a date stamp in the passport,and sent me on through to my near-frantic OH on the other side!That’s not exactly the promised ‘freedom from imigration control’ on the Home Office website!
This just should not happen; it certainly FEELS discrimnatory to me, and frightening too.Bad enough to be a visitor from the Commonwealth and get treated likean alien, but when you are a legal long term resident with everything you possess there, it is so much worse!
January 12th, 2011 at 3:27 am
I agree with most of the posts here, travel between Commonwealth realms should be far easier than ‘inter-continental’ travel due to the strong ties and historical allegencies of the Cth Realms.
I’m sure that in each national law (although i may be mistaken!) that commonwealth citizens are supposed to be afforded a ‘non-foriegn’ status, surely this should ease things at border controls.
I believe that the Commonwealth should come closer together and instead of just being an inter-governmental organisation, should become more of a political alliance based on equal representation of each Cth Nation – if done properly, it could well prove to be a stronger and more fruitful alliance than that of the EU… who knows?
I feel that more ought to be done in this area to benefit all commonwealth citizens and nations – and even though I am a Scot that is hell bent on seeing an independent Scotland, I would still like to see any ‘potential’ independent Scotland as part of a Commonwealth of Nations that has real global clout and not just a huge pointless symbol of historical ties as it is currently.
January 17th, 2011 at 7:34 am
So can anyone tell me exactly, what are the current advantages of being part of the Commonwealth?
Growing up as an Anglo South African in the 70′s and 80′s, was as good as being British.
Untill last years,all Sth Africans could travel freely and unihindered to and from the UK as could British Nationals, Aussies, Kiwi’s and Canadians travell freely to Sth Africa, and they still can.
Nowdays, South Africans need a Visa, obtained after a difficult and expensive process, to enter the UK. (Also to Canada, Australia and New Zealand)
This irks me as Sth Africa as well as hundreds of thousands of other Commonwealth citizens gave their lives for Britain, in two world wars.
So to get messed about by British immigration just so that I can visit the land of my ancestors, really annoys me.
It was only 65 years ago that Winston Churchill in a famous speech was talking about ” Britain and HER Commonwealth, lasting for a thousand years”
How sad it is that only 65 years later, Churchills words mean nothing anymore.
All my Grandparents and both my parents are British subjects yet a man with an east european accent gets to stamp my passport at Heathrow airport nowdays, while any Polish soccer hooligan walks into Britain unhindered.
I know that the British politico’s argue that they need a Visa system to controll immigration from the poorer commonwealth countries yet they seem to be blind to the completely uncontrolled mass immigration taking place to the Uk from poor European countries.
If you dont believe me, then just try order a beer in English in any pub in London, you need a Portugues or Polish dictionary so that the barman will understand you.
There needs to be tangible and real benifits to Commonwealth citizens otherwise the Commonwealth Organisation and summit is nothing more than an expensive p1ss-up.
Rant Over!
Thanks for listening.
March 18th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
emh.. young commonwealth should move forward..
we all should think to push our right. COMMONWEALTH BRITISH is’t history association.
we are constitutional linking generation.. right of British Subject outline on statut and constitution for most of British Commonwealth country..
March 18th, 2011 at 10:41 pm
I think the situation with Britain in regards to the Commonwealth countries is deplorable.
I am a Canadian. In Canada the British Queen is apparently our head of state. Her face is on all our money and in all our civic buildings. My mom had to sing God Save the Queen before school every day when she was a kid in the 1960s. Members of my family fought in the RAF and drove medical vehicles in WWII for the British army. Need I remind anyone, that traditionally “colonial” troops were the first ones put in front of the enemy by the British army, resulting in massive losses of Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders in WWI and WWII.
So let’s see, my Canadian born grandfather would be considered British enough to die for Britain fighting the Nazis, but his grand-daughter isn’t even allowed to stay in this country beyond to years to teach British children in inner-city London. Meanwhile, the grandchildren of Nazis who tried to kill British subjects freely allowed to settle here.
That makes so much sense.
April 8th, 2011 at 11:37 am
I was born in St lucia in June 1963,my brith cert says british.I traviled to England on ny mothers passport in 1965 at the age of year and eleven months.Can someone PLEASE tell iam i still British as i have read the 1981 act and it say iam the passport offices says iam not,PLEASE HELP.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
I found this page while searching for any evidence that being from a Commonwealth country would make emigrating to the UK any easier, as I could see no such provisions on official websites. Clearly, it is of absolutely no advantage. In fact, despite being Canadian, it almost seems as though I would be better off attempting Polish citizenship through my mother’s side, and using THAT to emigrate to the UK.
It’s probably just the frustration talking, but it’s difficult when I’m educated, certified in numerous computer technologies, but when looking through the list of occupation shortages, I see that my time would have been better spent learning how to shear sheep rather than getting Microsoft Certified.
I feel as though if having the Queen on my currency, having her government representative in the form of the Governor General, supporting Britain throughout the World Wars (and others) doesn’t at least short-list a citizen of that country, then why bother being a Commonwealth Country? At this point, I simply fail to see any advantages.
February 7th, 2012 at 2:33 am
I totally agree with almost every post here.
I am an Australia with Scottish background and it’s terrible that I will find it harder to travel to the UK than someone who is not from a Commonwealth country, it’s disgusting actually!!