Politics and particularly New Zealand First has become pretty ugly lately.
Changes in Immigration policy has meant that the partners of Kiwis who have entered into arranged marriages were finding it more and more difficult to come to New Zealand.
This caused considerable consternation among the Indian community who was particularly affected at the delays that were caused and the rapid decline in approvals being granted.
Shane Jones then went full Trumpian, got out the flamethrower and gave everyone a good spray. From Jo Moir at Radio New Zealand:
… [S]enior New Zealand First MP and Cabinet minister Shane Jones told RNZ he was saddened by the “levels of verbiage that the Indian communal leadership have thrown at the party”.
“I would just say to the activists from the Indian community, tame down your rhetoric, you have no legitimate expectations in my view to bring your whole village to New Zealand and if you don’t like it and you’re threatening to go home – catch the next flight home.”
Peters had a spray as well.
Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters was happy to take the credit for a tougher approach to partnership visas.
“Has New Zealand First had an influence on trying to tidy up the quality of information on which the immigration department relies? The answer is profoundly yes.”
It was simple, he said, you’re either a partner under New Zealand law, or you’re not.
“It’s clear as daylight – they’re not partners – full stop”, he said.
And to make sure that no one missed the dog whistle Jones gave it another blow last Tuesday. From Collette Devlin at Stuff:
New Zealand First MP Shane Jones is making no apology for his “racist” comments aimed at the Indian community and wants to see a tougher crackdown on immigration with a national population policy.
He told Stuff on Tuesday he was speaking on behalf of “battalions” of “ordinary Kiwis who were highly anxious” about population growth putting stress on state services and infrastructure.
Things became that ridiculous Simon Bridges accurately described Jones’ comments as distasteful and wrong. I wonder how he feels about National’s belief that two Chinese candidates are worth more than two Indian candidates.
Immigration New Zealand said that the policy was not racist. New Zealand First was clearly trying its best to make it appear that the policy was racist.
I am pleased that Jacinda Ardern has stepped in and required Immigration New Zealand to reverse the policy. From Derek Cheng at the Herald:
Immigration NZ is to blame for the partnership visa rules that have upset the Indian community and those changes will be reversed, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says.
The issue has upset the Indian community, which says that the stricter interpretation of the rules – including for couples to have lived together for 12 months – meant that many spouses in arranged marriages did not qualify.
It led to a verbal stoush between the Indian community and New Zealand First MP Shane Jones, whose fiery comments including telling immigrants to leave the country if they did not like the rules.
The Indian community accused Jones of racism, which he strongly rejected – though he said he would continue to be vocal on immigration issues as it was fertile vote-winning ground for New Zealand First.
Immigration Minister Iain Lees-Galloway has said he would review the rules in light of the Indian community’s concerns, but Ardern went a step further today.
“That was changed as a result of Immigration NZ officials, changing the way they were operating,” Ardern said.
“They did not do that under the authority of Cabinet … it was a decision made arbitrarily by officials.
“My expectation is that will reverse back to the status quo and the way it was operating before.”
Well done Jacinda. And if you need any reason to work for a Labour-Green coalition Government next year I think this is all that you need.
The bitching and moaning from the Indian migrant community at New Zealand exercising it's right to set it's migration rules is, I suppose, a tribute to the robustness of Indian democracy. But not much else.
What the hell is that comment supposed to mean?
You despise Indians?
Really?
There's no racism here – the Indian community self-selected this difficulty. The trials required of long term cohabiting spouses by Immigration are not trivial, but these activists expect a free pass on cultural grounds, and the real reason is that they have became accustomed to doing any damned thing they please under the ineffectual administration of the Key Kleptocracy.
Labour will shed support big time on this issue, there is little or no support either for mass immigration or for the disingenuous faux racism claims of the kind raised against Corbyn/antisemitism, Twyford/Chinese names, and now Jones/Indians. Lees Galloway should concern himself with protecting NZ's enlightened best interests rather than trying to curry favour with a cynical interest group who won't be voting for him anyway.
Why should it hurt? All that is happening is that the previous policy is being reinstated.
The previous policy of selectively not enforcing the law.
Ask anyone who has brought a partner through the Byzantine malice and incompetence of the Immigration maze if they think an exception should be made for arranged marriages – they'll be speechless.
Sounds like the immigration people are leaders in the cesspool division of New Zealand 'public servants'. 'Byzantine malice and incompetence of the Immigration maze'!
Oranga Tamariki are in that division, and of course WINZ winding down the old, though grudging, respect for people as part of the overall citizens NZ population to – clients – customers – deplorables! Like a reverse of that sequence of ape ascending into proud man.
The stories coming out of folk interacting with MBIE would put them in the naughty corner too.
How can that be . The rule of a stable permanent relationship was the previous policy and still is for all countries including those born and lived their whole life here.
What had happened was the 'discretion exception for special cases' became the standard option for India only.
What happens now for older male Kiwis who want mail order brides from Philippines or Ukraine. Do we have to say this is an appropriate way to give a relationship visa because 'these things happen' and picking women from a catalogue is an 'arranged marriage' too?
It will work because the neoliberal/establishment consensus around high levels of Asian and Indian immigration is (and always has been) actually just an elite consensus. New Zealanders were never asked if we wanted make 15% – and growing – of our population Asian and Indian within a generation and a lot of native born New Zealanders – including a ton of Ngati Pakeha and Maori (Maori can see the writing on the wall for their status under our current offically bi-cultural policies and of the centrality of the Treaty of Waitangi) – don't like it.
NZ First was founded as an anti-immigration, and therefore anti-establishment, party. By rarking up simmering ambient resentment at unasked for mass immigration they can damage both Labour and National but especially Labour, because they are far more identified with identity politics (this will quickly morph into a Brexit style culture war) than National.
Damaging Labour? Winston First leaving themselves with only the Nats as coalition partners at the next election seems a tad risky given their current fraught relationships.
The Clarke and Key rule of politics says that a the major party 'takes under its wing' as many coalition parties as possible, not the minimum number.
Labour will always look to have Greens and NZF with them in government and any others that want to go along for the ride. Im sure the leaders of the Greens know that , even if many Greens supporters here seem to have the mistaken belief it may be Greens OR NZFirst.
It's not the Greens who have ruled out working with Winston First. Why do you think there are no Greens inside cabinet.
Labour have been damaged far more by perceptions around who is actually running the coalition, with NZF disrupting Labour policy on a number of occasions.
This move by the PM is likely to help Labour, but watch out for more NZF outbursts as they try to differentiate themselves going into next years election.
You're mixing up multiple issues with a spurious label of "Indian community".
The government has rightly moved to stop the fake diploma and visa scams, which was a significant part of the uncontrolled immigration. They've cracked down on unscrupulous employers too. This issue is not about "mass immigration", but individual rights. The PM understands this, even if you do not.
And jibes like "Bollywood" from Jones are as unsubtle as it gets.
It's not a spurious label, though of course it should include the Pakistani community, who also practice arranged marriage. If Labour want to accommodate arranged marriages, they should draft appropriate legislation, not try to slip it under the radar like the sleazy crooks on the other side of the debating chamber.
Our rules are not made in contemplation of such arrangements, any more than our social welfare rules were designed to accommodate the polygamous marriages of some refugee communities.
The government has not gone far enough on immigration – 50 000 is better than 70 000, but the implicit design of massively increasing our population has neither a moral, nor a popular, nor in fact an economic mandate. WTF do they think they are doing?
Agreed. However the PM is saying the agency's managers made that decision, not Ministers.
An opposition worthy of the name would make hay from such an assertion.
"You can't control your officials? Golly – what are you doing in government?"
And so they should.
Bought and paid for.
Shane Jones won't change. But his job can.
The PM has been given plenty of reasons to sack him. If NZF don't like that and want to pull the government down, they will be signing their own suicide note. Let them.
And it's not just about whether you agree with Jones or not. Ministers have specific roles, and need to stick to them, which is why James Shaw doesn't tell Hipkins what to do in the education portfolio, and David Clark doesn't pretend he's the Foreign Minister. Government discipline 101.
But Shane Jones thinks he's too big for any of that. He needs to discover how small he really is.
I'd say the PM will be hoping for voters to solve the problem for her next year. Imagine having to put up with smug flaccid arsewipes like Jones every week.
"And it's not just about whether you agree with Jones or not. Ministers have specific roles, and need to stick to them, "
Havent read the Labour NZ First Coalition agreement which Ardern signed have you
"As provided for in the Cabinet Manual, the Parties will “agree to disagree” where negotiated between party leaders, and in such circumstances the Parties will be free to express alternative views publicly, and in Parliament."
Im still amazed at the people who think MMP hasnt arrived and Coalition governments havent changed the way rival parties speak on various issues.
No other minister abuses that agreement in the way that Jones does. It is simply not a matter of policy differences, it is a deliberate – and increasingly desperate – tactic to get NZF above 5%.
The Greens disagree with many policies and still behave like grown-ups. Shane Jones is what he is – a man-child whose self-regard vastly outweighs his talents.
So every time they have a disagreement , its should be like grownups and kept out of public ?
What do you really know about politics ?
Enough to see a reductio ad absurdum.
More like when you agree with the party who is airing the differences- Greens- its seen as 'Adult'
What did you think of the 'slapdown' of Greens over the reversal by labour ministers of the Waihi tailings dam consent?
As I pointed out … the Ministers act in their portfolios. See? It's not hard.
Disagreements aren't the problem. Bad faith is.
Name one example in the last two years of Green or Labour Ministers doing what Jones is doing. Go on.
Didnt even read my comment either.
Coalition Party – NZF can speak out about any bloody issue they like Read it !
Parties will be free to express alternative views publicly, and in Parliament."
Sticking to your portfolio in this context is for labour ministers.
Whats the point of contributing when you have made your mind up regardless of the evidence to the contrary. Yes you dont agree, but its not some 'convention' at all.
That agency has had major culture problems for decades. Let's see some proper internal accountability for decisions like this. And if Winston First want to applaud the miscreants instead, let's at least hear their names and proud backgrounds.
A Decision to stick to the long time policy of a 'stable and permanent relationship' ?
https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/tools-and-information/support-family/partnership
Assessing partnership
When we assess if you meet our partnership requirements, we'll look at things like:
Evidence of partnership
You and your partner must provide enough evidence to show us that you're living together in a genuine and stable relationship.
What was the Agency culture you have a problem with ?
Marriages of convenience are reserved for Indian immigrants only…talk about…currying…favour.
Fantastic, NZF and national fighting over the dog whistle. This should be very entertaining and will allow JA to rise above the twitteratti styled spin with a clear concise campaign.
Try not to F this one up labour.
Bookface is where the spin happens.
Fwiw I use the term twitterati as a blanket term for all social media.
In football the players accounts are managed by paid PR agencies so their posts aren't even their own.
It has a quite limited meaning the way I've seen others use it.
If Labour are serious about the responsibilities of a state soliciting migrants, and they want to create a system that accommodates arranged marriage, then it is desirable that they create some protections for dowry brides and the like.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/68721673/police-get-guidelines-on-investigating-forced-marriages
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12123831
Thats the other big elephant in the room for arranged marriages . DOWRY
A NZ residence visa for the male allows them to expect a hefty dowry for a female bride from India.
Then there is the otherside of coin of young women already in NZ who are forced into arranged marriages mostly overseas
Forced and underage marriage
It’s not okay for your parents to force you to get married, whatever your age: it’s your right to stay at school or at work, and to choose your spouse or life partner. According to New Zealand law, both parties in a marriage or civil union must be consenting.
Any form of marriage , no matter from what country or culture where the woman is treated as a chattel can never be acceptable.
Mail order brides, arranged marriages , forced marriage of young women
I had some Pakistani friends awhile back, who had a perfectly happy and unobjectionable arranged marriage, so it's not all horror stories. ( I interviewed them about it as part of the requirements of a teaching diploma. ) But the number of stories of exploitation call for some kind of protection, which is in fact the purpose of the existing relationship requirements in the current immigration rules.
I expect that such changes would be regulation rather than statute, and while he's at it Lees-Galloway might wish to rid himself of some of his more egregiously non-performing officials.
I am no fan of shame jones but I agree with him on this issue and labour better get their shit together because they have 7 Maori seats and they know many of our people aren't happy with the immigration rates and it ain't racism its our right to speak up. Many of those people come here and tramp on our culture and then they say how come Maori are getting this and that when we are getting fuck all. They want us to change our policies to suit their culture well sorry is doesn't work like that when we go to their countries we follow there rules, laws and customs.
Lees-Galloway needs to be reshuffled out fast.
Jones is doing an excellent job for his party, leadership chances, and 2020 positioning.
This is not about immigration, it is essentially a human rights issue – it is about the right of a woman to freely choose her partner.
Until Indian women demand that right, NZ should not support the tradition of arranged marriage, just as we do not allow FGM
Good grief! The comments above clearly show racism is alive and well in NZ.
Ditto! Some people need to actually read mickysavage's post.
Absolutely. And suddenly everyone seems to be an expert on arranged marriages and Dowry.
Deal with the problem cases (probably around 10%) otherwise we all better assimilate before the rush – or vote NZ First
Christ! Reading a lot of the above, it’s no wonder the ‘left’ and so-called progressives are so good at tearing each other apart
Totally IMO that's a key part of NZF/national strategy. Riffing on prejudice, misinformation and ignorance and trusting in good old kiwi apathy.
One of shonkys greatest political achievements IMO was to throw so much spin (via DP as well as himself and ministers) and drag the whole tone down so the average kiwi says 'they're all the bloody same those pollies'.
Job well done sir shonky.
Yup.
As someone whose broader family comprises Maori/Pakeha/Indian (mainly Sikh), and not through design, and doing my very best to avoid a discussion on 'the effects of colonisation', I have to say that most Indians are closer to the values and practices of Maori culture than they are to its colonisers. Much fucking closer!
The double standards and hypocrisy just astound me at times.
I thought I'd give up on TDB and see what's going on here. It's fucking depressing.
The claims that Indians are intent on bringing the whole village, and that they'll be a burden on Nu Zull Tex Paya, when as a select committee hearing not long ago heard that those immigrants becoming a drain on social services was less than 1%
The Dowry thing. Us real Kiwis of course prefer to be showered with gifts and stuff and things, and then to battle out who gets what in the courts, when the marriage goes tits up and who gets custody of the possessions (including the chillin).
And then (as some 'expert' over on TDB suggests), they're all bloody mysoginistic and anti-feminist – probably on the basis of knowing one or two curry munchers that are his or her best friend.
As a nation, we really haven't progressed that much from being a pimple on the arse end of the Earth and Our Master's Voice and farmyard have we!
Well done that Pretty Communist JacinTa for calling our Peter Dutton.
Whilst Shane might be fucked if he's going be told what to do by some bloody immigrant. I'll be fucked if I'm going to buy into Shane's bloated fucking ego and grandstanding. He really should get a bit honest AND over his mid-life crisis.
Oh! Quelle Horreur! In Breaking newz….. Jesse@ # RNZ; @ # BullshitandSpinGoingForward) tells us Our Munstry of bullshit and spin has apologised and failed us (OT).
No surprises there. Next
Brilliant comment Tim!
Well….we all know what to get him for Kirimete eh? It'd be one of those fairground concave mirrors that he could stand in front of looking a lot less of a a pudge, to practice his talking points – like "queue jumper", and "Mumbai Bollywood", and "village", and "retail politician". Wouldn't be too long before he could progress to "God I'm Gorgeous!.
We'd probably have to pack it with a warning though. His dick might look a little bit .smaller than it actually is.
I 'spose we could get "one of his rellies off the couch" to deliver it though, and train him in the art of worship and praising his master's superior intellect.
So you dont agree with this then- "Any form of marriage , no matter from what country or culture where the woman is treated as a chattel can never be acceptable."
jeez the Italians , especially from the Southern part had arranged marriages after they migrated to Australia… It wouldnt be accepted now
The new film "Promised" covers such a combinare
"The story told in Promised is of an arranged marriage between the children of Italian immigrants in Melbourne. The deal is struck in 1953, when Robert is a young boy and Angela is an infant in a crib. Twenty-one years later, and despite the fact Angela has a boyfriend, everyone expects the arrangement to be kept."
And you think that doesn't happen in Aussie today??
I'll take your one flick and raise you one "Ali's Wedding"
Not with Southern Italians, no.
Rather than importing someone who they've never met – which is surely wide open to abuse – how about these men go over to India and marry the woman and return with a legal wife?
Duh ….They are doing exactly that …the issue is INZ requires every other non Indian couple to prove ( thats documentary proof) THAT they are in a stable relationship , AND have lived together for at least a year ( they allow both legal marriage and de facto relationships)
That's what I meant.
No you didnt mean that . You said get a 'legal wife' . Thats always been happening , its not called arranged marriage for nothing. Its not some special rules for those just living together.
Say you were a NZ guy/woman living in London or Singapore , meet and marry a local and want to come to NZ with new husband/wife, but if you have been married/relationship for say 3 months , its a no no, as its still 9 months to go and all the documentary proof to go with that.
They take the opportunity to ask for a bit more than that (quote from Facebook):
I watched the stress and hoops my sister went through to get her husband in here . Why should it be automatic for just a few ? Was very expensive , many trips for xrays , blood tests , police records , character references . Its huge .
Changing times: NZ projected % population increases by ethnic group, to 2038 from a 2013 ‘base’.
European or Other: + 14.2%
Maaori: + 53 %
Pacific: + 71 %
ME/Latin/African: +223 % (off a relatively small base)
Chinese: +126 %
Indian: +130 %
http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLECODE7560
"Ethnicity is the ethnic group or groups that people identify with or feel they belong to. Ethnicity is a measure of cultural affiliation, as opposed to race, ancestry, nationality, or citizenship. Ethnicity is self-perceived and people can belong to more than one ethnic group."
Arranged marriages happen all the all over the planet. just ask the royals, anywhere.
Arranged marriages are not forced marriages. Arranged marriages are not child marriages.
Some fact checking is in order.
Shane Jones ought not to be using Donald Chump as a mentor, tempting as it is.
OBTW the whakapapa of a lot of iwi and hapu would reveal lots of arranged/agreed marriages.
Jones is an ignoramus beating an immigration drum.
NZF is a British biased party. It is time they grew up.
Yes, I know the ethnicity of NZF leadership. Their support base (diminishing) are british colonialists and imperialists, (Robs mob).
We heard a lot from Indian men about how the immigration policy was unfair and it was totally from the persepective of males going back to India to find a bride. What I would like to hear is the perspective of Indian women.
There are some arranged marriages that work out well but I've witnessed/heard of (first hand/second hand) some arranged marriages there were horrific.
Not sure why arranged marriages require special dispensation. Surely the issue is living together, regardless of whether or not one has first become married.
For an arranged marriage just get married first and live together in the home country for a year.
For others it is not get married first, and live together in the home country for a year.
Can't understand why the former case should somehow be privileged.
Someone not handicapped by phone use could perhaps provide a link to the interview today between Kim Hill and the woman from Shakti.
Okay, she's just a woman (and what would she know etc…) but calling those criticizing arranged marriage 'racist' and 'ignorant ' is perhaps a little misogynistic?
[lprent: https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2018721442/shakti-nz-founder-farida-sultana-on-arranged-marriage ]
Many thanks.
I was reading the comments here the other day….hoping within hope that Shakti would speak out on this issue.
There is a massive problem with Shane Jone's comments regardless of your views on arranged marriages and exceptions being made for Indian spouses.
Different groups will have different demands at different times. Sometimes these demands are reasonable, other times not. On this one I don't know enough about it —but I'm inclined to think that the Indian spouses should be subjected to the same rules as everyone else.
But for Shane Jones to indulge in a barrage of racist fear mongering verbal filth should be utterly condemned – regardless of one's views on this particular issue.
That is, one could oppose the demands of the Indian community on this one particular issue, but also utterly condemn Shane Jone's for his racist comments. No contradiction whatsoever.
I agree that Shane Jones went too far with his comments, however, the government has really thrown its immigration officials under the bus with this one. The reality is that many of the applicants just don't meet the "bona fide" criteria (having an incentive to return in the case that the relationship doesn't work out) and if it's going to be fair then it will need to be applied across all cultures who have cultural marriages otherwise it will be discriminatory. There is also a huge problem in that there are "culturally arranged marriages" that are organised by the families and then those that claim to have a cultural marriage when they have gone overseas and self-selected their partner from within their own culture. There also needs to be a discussion about how the women in these situations in NZ are faring. Are they, in general, okay and happy with the situation or do they end up socially isolated away from their families back home.
Gee i didn't hear any of you lot condemning bob jones for his racist ongoing rants about Maori why is that because he is rich you are scared