Migrants in New Zealand on temporary visas such as work or student visas are being warned if they break the law they risk being deported.
The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), which incorporates Immigration NZ, says immigration officers are concerned at the number of temporary migrants committing crimes, apparently unaware of the implications this could have on their immigration status in NZ.
Steven Watson, MBIE's General Manager for Immigration Compliance and Investigations, says in some areas of the country, increasing numbers of migrant workers in construction, tourism and hospitality are facing alcohol-related charges and court appearances.
"What may be perceived as a minor offence or misdemeanour back home can have serious consequences here," MBIE said in a statement.
"Deportation may be the outcome for migrants who commit crime in New Zealand."
"For serious criminal offenders, it is often the only option, once their custodial sentence is served."
Watson said offenders were often unaware of the consequences of what they see as minor matters.
"And they're shocked when we tell them that committing a crime may mean an early plane ride home.
"If you commit an offence, it may affect your ability to remain in the country."
"Deportation may [also] affect their ability to return to New Zealand and potentially their ability to visit other countries as well," he said.
The comment stream on this article is now closed.
19 Comments
No! Surely they're all hard working, honest, lovely people who have been extensively vetted by the DIA?
The worst will come when the economy sours further leading to migrants losing their jobs and overstaying/resorting to crime becomes more commonplace. Our authorities won't have the resources or bandwidth to deal with this added caseload and the government of the day will probably want them to look the other way instead.
My father was based in Singapore back when the GFC hit and there was quite a bit of nuisance caused by low-skilled migrants from other Asian countries not wanting to call it quits and return home. Mind you, we're talking about an authoritarian state with government and policing system more interested in upholding the rule of law than protecting their public image.
"risk" being deported. Sigh. They should be guaranteed to be deported. In fact, we should be applying the Australian deportation standards here - anyone who holds a second passport and commits a crime, should be deported. That would remove a significant chunk of people from our prisons and reduce welfare beneficiaries.
Yep but I would go further.
Any ummigrant committing a major crime ( murder and rape etc) and commercial stuff like money laundering, meth or other importation, and abuse of workers rights has at least a ten year window for immediate asset seizure and deportation.
Australia is unable to deport anybody who holds Australian Citizenship even if they hold a second citizenship - except if they are found guilty of terrorism crimes. The Liberal National Party tried to introduce this in 2014 and the High Court of Australia ruled against them.
Excluding the handful of people whose citizenship was removed for acts of terrorism (the most famous involving a NZ citizen who was an ISIS Wife) those Australia deports are all "non Australian Citizens" and even then the rule is the person must have committed an offence that carries a sentence of 12 months imprisonment. Please note the person dted doesnt have to have received an imprisonment of 12 months, they just need to be convicted of the crime that has a sentence of 12 months.
Ah well. At least that would still be a good start.
I hope we do criminal and other checks on all immigrants
Come on NZ raise the bar
They only need to provide a police certificate.
The thing is in those countries you can pay the police and all your criminal history is gone
Then we assume immigration is reading & fact checking the attached documentation from all applicants and not just going ah there is a document attached, not read it and automatic approval of contents.
Considering the effort involved of those following the rules (e.g. for a SAF getting police reports from all countries of travel is pretty arduous) it would behove the immigration dept to at least read the reports provided and then ascertain the contents are valid and not fraudulently created.
How anyone anywhere who is in a country they are not native to, can think that committing crime won't have any impact on their ability to stay in said country, is beyond me. If you go to another country, that is your #1 priority apart form surviving, obey the law.
Like the two Kiwi bozos in a Thai jail for attacking a police officer.
Yeah when there was a petition to govt MPs to help secure their release, (including during the govt visit) I was very morally confused. Was what they did a crime (yes), should they have been aware it is it a crime (answer is clearly yes as in this country it is a serious one), is the Thai justice system valid in its punishment (yes), would they experience undue harsh conditions in a Thai jail (no). Should they be able to walk away without punishment simply because they were tourists? Hell no and it is the same in this country.
Except we actually do let people leave first before they are brought up on charges because in NZ justice is slow and ineffectual. But in NZ if people stay in the country, waiting around for months for sentencing etc then they could most likely face community detention which could be commuted, or minor prison sentences which could be commuted, but I am sure we would say what they did is not very nice and it was a bad thing and they should stay home to think about what they did in funded accommodation with full internet access to do what they like.
Would they experience "undue harsh conditions" in a Thai jail? Hell, yes, they would! Thai jails are HORRIBLE places and I say this as someone who lived and worked in Bangkok for the best part of 2 decades and did some voluntary translation work for the Royal Thai Police. You *really* do not want to end up in jail in Thailand as the conditions are horrific. Now with that said, what those two clowns did was moronic and they will likely be looking at a few years in jail in Thailand before they make it back home.
Unfortunately, I have first-hand experience of this. Our neighbours own a bunch of bakeries in Napier and Hastings and the house is full of migrants from Cambodia. They enjoy a drink and think nothing about driving after they've been on the turps. Less than two months after moving in, they crashed in to the boundary fence between our respective houses, causing thousands of dollars of damage. Then a couple of months later, they crashed in to the "power dome" which is at the end of each of our driveways, shoving it a full foot. The guy from Unison who came to fix it said it was amazing that power wasn't knocked out.
We were going to call the cops after the second incident but they pleaded with us not to. I suspect they were concerned about the possible visa implications if the driver was charged with drunk driving. They were left in no uncertain terms that if they do it again, the cops will be called.
Let's migrate cops to handle those criminals
are we too woke to consider following the lead of the UK and produce a league table of offending migrant source countries?could help when making a quota of which nationalities are desirable migrants
It's unlikely to happen while public sector jobs are being cut.
1. We already have a measure of league tables; we enforce higher restrictions, more police checks and documentation from migrants from those countries we add to our league tables.
2. Any country of origin providing the highest number of migrants will can have the highest number criminal offending due to the outsized and over supply of migrants from those countries even though the Proportion offending can be lower. Also if the number migrating is too low then the measure is irrelevant as the sample size is too small.
e.g.
10 migrants come from Armenia and 1 offends in 1 year: offender rate 10%, number of offenders 1
100000 migrants come from a more populous country and 100 commit serious offenses: offender rate: 0.1%, number of offenders 100
Which then is worse and should be added to the league tables. Its a trick question because any measure of offenders vs country would lead to incorrect restrictions based on the data available. In reality our league tables (countries whose migrants face extra restrictions and conditions of entry) are based on their own legal, judicial, threat levels in their country, the human rights records and with a lot of racial bias added in.
Note this also excludes those under refugee status and applying for refugee status can be done after you have already entered the country.
Typical civil service. Making warnings they won't follow through on.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.