THE PRESS MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1981. Checking Tasman travellers

Press, 20 April 1981, Page 12

THE PRESS MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1981. Checking Tasman travellers

New Zealanders and Australians are at present able to travel .to one another’s countries without travel documentation of’ any kind and, if they wish, to>settle and work. This is a rare arrangement between countries and forms part of the special relationship between the two. After the meeting in Wellington last week attended by the Australian Minister of Immigration (Mr Macphee), the New Zealand Minister of Immigration (Mr Malcolm), and Australian state Ministers who look-after immigration, something less than the present arrangement seems likely.- Both Mr Macphee and Mr Malcolm will report to their respective Cabinets but the signs are pointing clearly to Australia’s taking some action to require travel documentation from New Zealanders.

New Zealand, according to the Prime Minister, Mr Muldoon, is opposed to the passport proposal. Although Australia has been at some pains to reassure New Zealand that, this move is in no way connected with the present strong feeling over the Springbok tour, it will take more than such assurances from a Government to keep the two separated in the minds of the public. For this reason it is an unfortunate time to raise the matter of passports or some other travel documentation. The reason it is being brought up so keenly at present is that the Australian Prime Minister (Mr Fraser) wants to take all possible precautions against terrorism at the. time of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting to be held in Melbourne in September. Memories linger of the bombing at the Sydney Hilton during the regional meeting of the Commonwealth Heads of Government. . , :

International terrorism, which may or may not have been involved in the Hilton bombing, is one of the stronger reasons supporting those who advocate.’ the introduction of travel documentation between the two countries. Drug-running is another. In addition, there are the people who are evading either maintenance payments or. civil or Criminal actions in the courts. The argument about drug running or terrorism would seem clinching until it is examined. Evidence given at the “Mr Asia” trial and from other sources suggests that the, illegal supply of convincing-looking passports is not a problem to. a well organised drug ring. Presumably international terrorists have similar access to false documents.

The question of evaders, people who are changing countries to evade some responsibility or to escape legal action, is rather different. In free societies the job of the police is made more difficult .because few checks on identification. The state borders in Australia do not have checks on identification. Movement within the Commonwealth of Australia is free. The intention is apparently to have identity cheeks between -' New .< Zealand and Australia. 1

Against the needs of the police and others to identify the few who abuse the system, must be balanced ’the ease of movement of the people who make the 800,000 or so. trips'across the Tasman each year. To some extent the advance-purchase air fares have complicated the issue. Although illegal, trading in the exchange of advance-purchase tickets occurs. The buye» has to travel under a false name, a

foreigner coming to Australia or New Zealand may still purchase a ticket under a false name and there is no check if he or she claims New Zealand or Australian identity.

There are good reasons for believing that this whole question need not have arisen. Australia now has computer checks of all entrants. New Zealand plans to have computers introduced by 1982. However there is at present no plan to link these computers to the Australian computers. Two things should have happened. One is that the computers should have been introduced to New Zealand before now. Only a “user survey” stage has been reached. The computers should also be linked with the Australian computers. The entry procedures would thus have been standardised. Why there is no plan to interface the computers is difficult to understand. If it is supposed that this would be a loss of sovereignty, the idea is nonsense.. Both New Zealand and Australia rely on other countries or international agencies, such as Interpol, for information to be fed into computers and other records that may be consulted to check on arrivals and departures. To put the best possible face on the whole plan, it may be, said that New Zealanders and Australians have a special relationship and that they need to carry a card to prove that they are truly New Zealanders or Australians. To some it probably will not matter much. It is now difficult to get a cheque accepted without identification and travel would seem to require a similar identification. That is not, however, the way that the large number of people who travel from Australia to New Zealand and in the other direction will see ■it even if the free and easy ways make nonsense of immigration policies. If, in . fact, a special travel card is required, rather than a passport, that will appear to travellers as a special type of visa. If, on the other hand, passports are required, there will be an end to this particular form of the special relationship, though the settling and working privileges will remain. The plan to make New Zealanders reside in Australia for three years before voting in an election is not directly linked to the travel documentation issue. It has come up at the same time. Australia’s large migrant population makes it important for Australia not to be seen to show favours to its migrants. This, too, is another point that makes the relationship special. One. Australian whose visit to New Zealand in 1975 made it possible for him to vote in both the New Zealand and the Australian elections that year, was heard to complain afterwards that, he had picked losers both times: Under the present proposals being considered by the Australian Government, New Zealanders and Australians are both likely to be losers. Sufficiept effort to police the entry of outsiders to both countries is obviously needed, more especially if travel between the two is so easy. Sufficient effort is also needed to inhibit or to monitor the transit of criminals and other evaders. If, however, the checks and documentation become the foundation for controlling legitimate exchange of citizens between Australia and New Zealand, almost all hope of extending relationships between the two will be lost: ‘