Brandon To is a Politics graduate from UCL and a Hong Kong BN(O) immigrant settled in Harrow.
A few weeks ago, during the Remembrance period, I was stopped at Marylebone Station by an elderly couple. They were warm, gracious, and unmistakably part of the generation for whom remembrance is not just a ritual, but a lived memory. The gentleman, a veteran, nodded towards the poppy on my coat and said with a smile: “Good to see young people wearing it. And good to see you wearing it.”
It was a simple remark, offered with genuine curiosity rather than politics. Perhaps he did not expect to see an Asian immigrant wearing a symbol so tied to Britain’s history and sacrifice. We ended up sitting down for a coffee together. I told them something I have said many times, but never to someone who had lived through the generation the poppy represents:
“I’m an immigrant from Hong Kong. I didn’t lose family members in British wars. But if I choose to make this country my home, the least I can do is honour its sacrifices and embrace its norms.”
Their faces softened. What began as a passing hello turned into a quietly profound moment of shared belonging. They represented a Britain rooted in continuity and gratitude. I represented an immigrant choosing to embrace that inheritance. It reminded me that Remembrance is not just about history — it is about integration.
And that is where our national conversation has gone so wrong.
In big cities like London, Birmingham and Manchester, one message is endlessly repeated: “Diversity is our strength.” But diversity, on its own, does nothing. It is not a social strategy. It is a demographic fact.
For diversity to be a strength, something deeper must hold a society together. A shared civic core. Common expectations. Newcomers adopting, not merely observing, British civic identity. Without this base, diversity becomes fragmentation: groups living side-by-side but not together, each carrying their own behavioural norms and private rules into public life.
So what is this civic core?
From my standpoint as someone who adopted it rather than inherited it, some examples include:
- remembrance and sacrifice
- the rule of law and constitutional culture
- public order
- courtesy and neighbourliness
- respect for institutions
- a monarchy that anchors continuity … and the list goes on
All of these are learnable. None ethnic. They are the shared moral grammar that makes Britain function. The invisible consensus that allows strangers to trust each other, queue without conflict, and honour a fallen soldier even if they have no personal connection to him.
Yet our politics increasingly reverse the sequence:
Diversity first. Integration optional.
That is how we arrive at a situation where bad behaviour is excused because it comes wrapped in cultural packaging. It is how irresponsible Diwali fireworks, or disruptive minority-group processions, are defended under the banner of “celebrating diversity”, rather than judged by the same standards of public order expected of everyone else.
We have forgotten a simple truth:
For a country to stand, something must hold it together.
Integration is the foundation; diversity is the decoration.
We need an unapologetically integration-first approach — one that expects, encourages, and equips newcomers to adopt British culture rather than simply add their own to an ever-growing patchwork. As I set out in my Integration-First proposal:
- Mandatory Integration Courses
Newcomers should be required to complete:
- higher-level English
- Thorough British history, law, and civic education
- norms around public behaviour and etiquette
- community participation
- a comprehensive civic test before settlement
Immigrants should understand not only how Britain works, but why it works. Why order matters, why Remembrance matters, why institutions and traditions matter.
- Regional Distribution — the Singapore Stabilisation Model
Integration is impossible where demographic over-concentration creates parallel societies. If a borough is already over 50% foreign-born, pausing new settlement there is common sense, not discrimination.
Redirecting newcomers to areas with higher integration capacity ensures they actually engage with British society, rather than clustering into linguistic and cultural enclaves.
- Control numbers to protect cohesion
Britain cannot integrate at scale without limits. A fair but firmer system protects everyone:
- better outcomes for newcomers
- less tension for host communities
- restored public trust in migration
Britain must remain open, but never unprotected or overwhelmed.
As I said goodbye to the veteran couple at Marylebone, the gentleman shook my hand and said: “You’re exactly what we hoped immigrants would be.” He meant it kindly, but it struck me as something bigger: a quiet expectation that newcomers should honour the country they choose to join.
They showed me what Britishness looks like: warmth, gratitude, continuity.
I showed them what integration looks like: honouring their history as if it were mine.
That exchange — brief, ordinary, yet somehow intimate — captured the choice facing Britain today.
We can continue down the path where diversity is celebrated without any expectation of shared norms. Or we can rebuild a Britain where identity comes before randomness, where belonging comes before difference, and where the poppy on a stranger’s coat is not a curiosity but a common symbol.
Integration must come first. Everything else follows.
