“Immigration Law Worst In World”

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32380, 20 August 1970, Page 2

“Immigration Law Worst In World”

New Zealand’s immigration law was one of the worst in the world, containing “shocking anomalies,” said Mrs E. Hollander, speaking in support of an inquiry into immigration, at the National Council of Women’s monthly meeting in Christchurch recently. “Families have been split, and husbands and wives treated differently,” said Mrs Hollander. After World War 11, when she was a member of a relief and welfare committee for refugees in New Zealand, these anomalies came to her notice. “New Zealand was the last place to accept refugees,” she said. “This law has not been changed much since 1908 and many instances of hardship have occurred recently.” The remit being considered for national conference in September was “that N.C.W. ask the Government to set up a committee of inquiry to look into the whole question of immigration into New Zealand.”

Special mention was made of “the absolute power vested in the Minister of Labour under the present act,” and “no right of appeal of individuals (the decision of the Minister is final).” Several speakers objected to the inclusion of these , points in the remit The president Mrs G. Safason, said she had not been able to find anything in the act which specifically excluded an appeal. In most cases she thought the minister’s approval would amount to “a rubber stamp.”

“We have in New Zealand one of the most lenient immigration laws in the' world. If we are willing to allow everyone in there will be standing room only on Mount Ruapehu,” she said. Someone had to have the final say, said one delegate. The minister had this authority as the head of a Government department The movers of the remit had suggested “that complaints should be investigated by a representative group of competent persons.” Case Histories Although she did not agree in full with the way the remit was set out, Mrs Hollander said she felt there was a case for looking into the law. She would be prepared to bring up-to-date case

histories to the next meeting. “We like to face the world as a liberal nation, but we in fact have rather vicious immigration laws,” a delegate added.

“There is one law for men and another for women. A soldier can bring home any woman he marries, but if a woman marries in many cases she almost ceases to be a New Zealander,” she said. “If you have a splash of colour in you, you find it difficult to get into New Zealand,” Miss S. Mann said.. “Most of us are sitting here because we are white.”

One of the most irritating aspects of the law was that so much was left in the hands of the minister.

The applicant could not argue. The minister did not have to give reasons. “This is very bad,” she said. “We should have an organisation which gives us some satisfaction when we try to get a person into New Zealand,” she said. Financial Drain A delegate expressed concern that if “the door was opened too wide” it would be a tremendous drain on the country’s social security system. The note to the remit mentions that the act excludes people with mental and physical disease, or those having a criminal record. The meeting decided to amend the remit to ask for a committee of inquiry to investigate immigration, omitting the clause relating to the powers of the minister. Support was also given to a remit from the Thames branch for an increase in the staff of psychopaedic hospitals to include trained social workers to enable regular visits to homes of mentally handicapped children.