- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Thai to foul up Field

Taito Phillip Field. Christian. A regressive type Christian.

Currently having a palace constructed by cheap Thai labour in Samoa. Overstayer drama. He has threatened: "If anything [inaccurate] comes in the paper [NZ Herald] you can expect a defamation suit to be laid against the paper and you will probably be talking about millions." Well I hope that everything that follows is kosher:

Labour Party against illegal migrants... hardly.
[Lefties skip to next heading]

Aunty Helen people-smuggled the Tampa hordes (at our expense) from the Indian Ocean as a unilateral action pre-empting Australia's "Pacific solution" in a desperate attempt to gain some cred in the Swedish socialist cocktail circuit. They shouldn't be here. Simple as that. Nor should their dozens of family members that have poured in under our open-ended "family reunification" category. Nor should they (or anyone else) be able to vote after only 2 years here.

Most New Zealanders are soft-headed fuckwits who have no appreciation of the precedents it sets or the reasons for it or the alternatives that were available - I understand that. I understand that most people are simple-minded enough to be impressed with ostentatious acts of generosity and simple-minded enough not to understand anything except for the feeling of having been (and be seen to be) generous. I understand that the Labour government, after assisting these illegal migrants, who were intent on applying for asylum only in Australia after going through many other countries, then passed a people smuggling law making it an offence with a 20 year jail term, (!) ie. on par with murder and rape, to assist anyone trying to illegally enter a country. I understand that they can't see their own hypocrisy.

Now this bringing the Tampa hordes in was the biggest people smuggling operation in decades. Those people assisted each other to get here and are people smugglers as far as I'm concerned. Similarly any people who helped them smuggle themselves who have been brought in under family reunification are also people-smugglers. Aunty Helen should be doing 20 years! Imagine if one of us was to try to bring in a Tampa horde. Would we be seen as great humanitarians - even if we did it for free? Look Aunty, I brought in a couple of thousand Afghans! - I'm just following your example - why aren't I receiving a medal? Why am I looking at 20 years? It doesn't make sense.

And for the record:
I know they are classified as "asylum seekers/refugees" and not as illegal migrants.
I know some of them were children and therefore could not be criminals in any sense.
I know they came out of our meagre refugee quota - and that just makes it worse. All the real refugees stuck in a transit camp in some hell hole gets pushed to the back of the queue because of this decision. "Sorry, mate I know you've applied properly and followed all the correct channels and have been waiting for years - but you see Aunty Helen has decided that your place will be taken this year by these criminals trying to get in to Australia - you go back to the end of the queue - here's your cup of rice, piss off."
I also know that Aunty Helen had no certainty about the legitimacy of their claims to refugee status before acting.
I also know that once they got here it would be almost impossible to get rid of them.
I also know that Aunty Helen knew that taking the youngest ones would mean taking their entire extended family as well. And that was the whole point. Parents endanger their children by sending them out to reach a first world country so they can all emigrate their without having to bother with the usual immigration hassles. These parents are people smugglers.

The other absurdity is that we have troops in Afghanistan - can't we send these troops to protect the family of these refugees so that the family can be reunified in their home country - under our protection? Does that not sound logical?

Field guilty under Crimes Act sec.98C?

The story fromthis NZ Herald article raises some legal qualms for Mr Field. Everyone is thinking of corruption as an MP, but I'm seeing something else:
98B: 'unauthorised migrant', in relation to a state, means a person who is neither a citizen of the state nor in possession of all the documents required by or under the law of the state for the person's lawful entry into the state.
98C.Smuggling migrants—
(1)Every one is liable to [imprisonment for a term not exceeding 20 years, a fine not exceeding $500,000, or both] who arranges for an unauthorised migrant to enter New Zealand or any other state, if he or she—
(a)does so for a material benefit; and
(b)either knows that the person is, or is reckless as to whether the person is, an unauthorised migrant.
(2)Every one is liable... who arranges for an unauthorised migrant to be brought to New Zealand or any other state, if he or she—
(a)does so for a material benefit; and
(b)either knows that the person is, or is reckless as to whether the person is, an unauthorised migrant; and
(i)knows that the person intends to try to enter the state; or
(ii)is reckless as to whether the person intends to try to enter the state...

BUT, Michael Cullen decides:
98F (1) Proceedings for an offence against section 98C or section 98D cannot be brought in a New Zealand court without the Attorney-General's consent.

Did Field arrange in some way the entry into Samoa?
Did Field intend to derive a material benefit (viz: assistance in constructing his palace in Samoa) from the man?
Was the man an "unauthorised migrant" because he did not have a work permit in Samoa at the time?
If the man was sent to Samoa to work, but had no work permit, is this "reckless" vis a vis (1) (b) and (2) (b)?

Other issues as to harbouring and assisting overstayers is probably an offence as well - but that is something for a proper researcher (like Idiot/Savant) to work out.

The facts according to today's NZ Herald:

"Mr Siriwan had been turned down for refugee status in New Zealand but had stayed in this country illegally... Mr Field asked Associate Immigration Minister Damien O'Connor to direct the Immigration Service to grant the Thai a work permit if he left the country and applied for it from Samoa... Mr O'Connor said last week that he had intervened to allow Mr Siriwan to reapply for a New Zealand work permit, but would be looking at the case again "given the new information that has come before me"....Mr Field said his family had paid Mr Siriwan up to 170 to 200 tala ($91 to $108) a week since March while he waited for his New Zealand permit to come through, but repeated yesterday that there was no "employment arrangement".

But Mr Field's wife, Maxine, confirmed last week that she applied for a Samoan work permit for Mr Siriwan. Officials granted it but wrote on it: "Conditional on continued employment with Field"...The Field family also paid about 5400 tala ($2900) to bring Mr Siriwan's partner, Luck, and their 2-year-old son from Thailand to join him in Samoa. Luck was deported to Thailand early this year after immigration officials found her during a raid on the house of another Thai family in Auckland.

Mr Field said yesterday he did not know about his wife's application for the Samoan work permit for Mr Siriwan.

"That is something Maxine did. It concerned her that if he was going to start looking for work there he would have to get a work permit," he said

And finally: why doesn't someone send someone to Samoa to investigate. I should think there would be plenty of volunteers given the weather lately.


Post a comment

<< Home