Talk Politics treats the Home Office’s questions for British citizenship with the contempt they deserve. The problem with the test is not merely that it is legalistic, but that it is too easy. As you know, I’m in favour, on balance, of free immigration. But standards must be upheld. A proper test for citizenship would contain questions like these:
1. Impersonate Colin Crompton.
2. Pronounce the following: Groby, Magdalen, Cholmondley.
3. Describe both Duckworth-Lewis methods, with suggestions for improvements.
4. Discuss the evils that have resulted from the decline of the beer mug.
5. “Dey do do Do, don’t dey Do?” Explain.
6. Distinguish between the Austin Cambridge and the Morris Oxford.
7. Les Kellett, How hard was he?
8. Complete this song lyric:
for there are brighter sides to life
and I should know because I've seen them
9. Who was the best Dr Who? Discuss with detailed analysis of his assistants.
10. Name the greatest living Englishman.
(Acceptable answers include, but are not confined to: Leslie Phillips, Humphrey Lyttleton, George Melly, Frank Bough, Stuart Hall, and Fred Elliot. Extra marks are given for Sir Royston of Cropper. A mandatory death penalty is to be applied to anyone answering Tony Blair or David Beckham.)
I'm all for the Groby pronunciation test; it'd exclude about 59m current citizens.
Posted by: Blimpish | November 01, 2005 at 11:01 AM
I'm not sure even Blowers could describe both DL methods...
Posted by: Paul Davies | November 01, 2005 at 11:08 AM
If tolerating the Smiths is to be a condition of British citizenship, I shall burn my passport in Parliament Square.
Posted by: chris | November 01, 2005 at 01:03 PM
_I'm all for the Groby pronunciation test; it'd exclude about 59m current citizens._
Including me, I fear. I'll pack me bags then...
Posted by: Jarndyce | November 01, 2005 at 01:12 PM
Those who pass the Groobeh test will then face the clincher: distinguishing between Thurlaston, Thurmaston, and Thurcaston.
Posted by: Chris Williams | November 01, 2005 at 01:57 PM
I gues I am staying in the US.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz | November 01, 2005 at 04:25 PM
Oi, wot abaht Norf ovva Bordah?
Pronounce Menzies, Marjoribanks, Mouswald, Ruthven..... or even Forsyth.
(As Miss Woods said: Scotland, where everywhere is spelled Ecclefechan and pronounced Kirkcudbright.)
Posted by: dearieme | November 01, 2005 at 09:55 PM
I was wondering when the oik's would speak up! now its my turn...
What about: Ponteland, Morpeth, Alnwick, Redheugh...
And they should be made to translate Geordie... training videos of Byker Grove could be made available.
And they should be able to describe what's in various curries or the culinary style - madras, bhuna, vindaloo, murgh etc.
All in all the citizenship test is a load of old bollocks. If they should test folks it should be on something useful for them to know like the electoral system, government, their rights, human and legal etc. Instead of daft questions about history and crap like that.
Posted by: angry economist | November 02, 2005 at 09:10 AM
Chris: How abouts...
Thurlaston: village in the direction of the arsehole of Leicestershire (=Hinckley).
Thurcaston: village that had a lucky escape when Thatcher's Government put paid to the later phases of expanding urban hell (=Beaumont Leys).
Thurmaston: bit in the middle on the road to Syston.
Posted by: Blimpish | November 02, 2005 at 11:34 PM
I am British and am about to move to the US and was wondering whether I should worry about the citizenship test. Just for a laugh I tried the trial british citizenship test and actually failed it. Surely this at least suggests that such tests are perhaps a little bit too difficult? Do countries pay any attention to peoples test results? I'm not an idiot and do have some idea of how the country works, having been born and lived here for 42 years!
Posted by: Mark Henderson | April 04, 2008 at 09:21 PM
Reading that through, perhaps my grammar might be questionable in places...
Posted by: Mark Henderson | April 04, 2008 at 09:22 PM