The power to deport

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33807, 2 April 1975, Page 18

The power to deport

A Crown Prosecutor in Auckland last week who sought the deportation of Polynesian immigrants convicted of crimes of violence did no more than express the feelings of many New Zealanders. His remarks were also in accord with the policy of the Government. In the review of immigration policy last year the Minister of Immigration (Mr Colman) said immigrants must be “ absorbed without undue social strain” and that intending immigrants would be assessed by criteria including “good health and character” In its election manifesto in 1972 the Labour Party promised to “ make the punishment fit the crime” and to “empower Magistrates to use more freelv * social punishment Deportation for a recent immigrant convicted of a violent assault is no more than fair protection for other residents in New Zealand. It should also act as a powerful deterrent to other would-be offenders. The speedy elimination of trouble-makers among new arrivals should help to ensure that law abiding immigrants, from the Pacific Islands or anywhere else, are accented readilv by the rest of the community. That, of course, is where the Crown Prosecutor’s remarks, like the comments of the Leader of the Onoosition (Mr Muldoon) last year, were at fault. Polvnes'an immigrants should not be singled out for snooi ;i i mention, just because there are more of tbom or thev ?*•» more conspicuous in the Courts No,.- 7 oo'md Courts. wenprally. show an tn an nffen'’ r, r’s race The C n’ro-iev ronommond freouenttv that tinner the terms nf ♦be Immigration Act. offenders who have been 'n *hr> coim’rv less than five 'tears and who are not Nev Zealand citizens, should be deported for ser'ou c offences after meeting anv other penalty imnosed. The final decision rests with the Minister of Immigration and in several notable cases in the last few years non-Polynesian offenders have been expelled. Figures given to Parliament last year by the Minister of Immigration showed that more Polynesians were deported than people from any other area, hut the nenaltv was also used against a considerable number or Australians. Britons, and offpndprs r»-orn vnron° and South-East Asia. j n the forp of New Zealand’s economic d'CScnHipc the ouite nrnnoriv. has made jmmim->tmn ’o •’-w roontrw a nmvpnge for those r-oct lil-r-’x- to *b° -a*’nn Tt is no* a right. I. n-m-n •u OVCT oaI V pc tn V»p unsuitable. I’ke f-nco (vhc on*-- illnmd'v c**nnld ho sent narking s „, at .«T,. iT na t N“’" gpaiandpre — and most rec«nt immigrants ■mill'’ a-nop this DOlicv. The Courts pnH the Immigration Department should he enropranod tn nprsue it vigorously. Thev will not be boined if nnhiir statements bv responsible neonle give the imnress>on. however wronglv. that denortation is reserved for only one group of immigrants.