Immigration policy riddled with holes

By PETER FOREMAN

The furore over immigration and the Government's knee-jerk reaction indicate growing concerns that need to be addressed urgently. There is little to be gained from hysterical attacks on Winston Peters. Shooting the messenger makes no sense when faced with issues of national interest.

Mr Peters has, in fact, done us a service by exposing an ad hoc immigration policy that would be a disgrace in any other First World country. Without proper planning and consistent policies we can expect only more anguish and further support for "populist" politicians who, after all, reflect the deep-seated disquiet of many New Zealanders.

There is no need for such a confused immigration policy, as other countries clearly demonstrate, and as I found through experience with the immigration policies of Britain, Canada and the United States.

I was told by Immigration Canada that in order to immigrate, I would, first, be required to pass Canadian professional board examinations. I would then need to prove I had a pre-arranged job in Canada.

My employer was also required to prove that no qualified Canadian citizen was available to fill the position.

I did not consider these requirements unreasonable. I thus find it rather difficult to sympathise with some immigrants who demand the right to practise their professions here without documentation of acceptable previous training.

Their ire might be better directed towards the stupidity of an immigration department which lured them to New Zealand without advising them they would be required to pass examinations designed to test their knowledge and skills, as required by most other countries.

Immigration Canada also required proof of the following:

* A declaration from the New Zealand Police stating I had no criminal record.

* Evidence of good health of all family members in the form of medical reports and x-rays.

* Private medical insurance for the first three months before qualifying for the Canadian health scheme.

* Bank statements and letters testifying we were able to support ourselves for at least one year without seeking welfare assistance from the Canadian Government.

* Acceptance that re-registration annually as immigrants would be required until Canadian citizenship was approved.

Contrast this with our laissez faire system. Criminal records are not always checked adequately and fake documents go undetected. How else are known criminals and members of vicious gangs able to enter the country?

Our medical requirements are lax when compared with Canada. Immigrants suffering from hepatitis, Aids and tuberculosis have entered without medical clearance and are a cost to an already strapped health system.

New immigrants without jobs, speaking no English, or lacking skills can register for the dole or obtain other benefits courtesy of the taxpayer.

Funds have reportedly been used to "buy" business entry to New Zealand only to be whisked away again, often leaving families to survive on welfare. Numerous scams have been revealed in the media.

Whenever such points are raised, the cry of "racist" is heard. It is a cop-out term that is often used to avoid any sort of reasoned discussion of the issues.

Few would disagree that we need skilled and qualified immigrants who wish to make our country their home, learn our customs, speak our languages, understand our cultures and respect our environment. We must make such people welcome. They will more than likely enrich our society with their talents, their customs and their economic contributions.

But we must also not open our door too widely, especially to those who would use us for their own ends. Many of the latter would find it very difficult to enter other countries. We need to be less naive, more streetwise and more selective.

We also need to be cautious about welcoming those who bring ethnic tensions and hatred with them. Many will be aware of the tidal wave of illegal immigrants into Los Angeles, the ghettos, the crime, the flight of Californians to other states, and the decreasing quality of life in that city.

Winston Peters may well have overstated his case, but some will have also noted the despoiling of beautiful cities like Paris and the growing urban terrorism from North African immigrant extremists, the increasing violence in Britain, and the doubling of Vancouver's population in little more than a decade. This placed enormous strains on that city's infrastructure.

In Auckland, in particular, we see similar strains.

It is realistic, not racist, to recognise that immigrants from different ethnic, religious and political backgrounds do not always mix, and often bring their hatreds and prejudices with them.

Why don't central Europeans and North Americans, who would assimilate readily into our culture, feature more highly in the list of approved immigrants? Is it a matter of how much money one brings? One could be forgiven for suspecting this on perusing New Zealand immigration application forms and recent immigration statistics.

Yet we now learn that many of the funds used to "buy" an immigration "ticket" leave the country again at short order. How dumb can we be?

We are told there are thousands of overstayers living in our country without proper documentation, which may be only the tip of an iceberg. Yet some politicians and civil libertarians are outraged when immigration officers evict them.

Are they not aware that many New Zealand citizens, and legal immigrants, are outraged that overstayers seem to feel they have a right to help themselves to our country without going through the proper processes?

Many of the questions I have raised will no doubt be denounced as xenophobic. But they deserve proper debate and plausible answers if New Zealanders are to feel more comfortable with the performance of their immigration service and positive about the future of the nation.

Rather than scream "racist" when questions are asked, it is time to end political points-scoring and plan an immigration policy based on our country's needs, rather than repeating the mistakes made elsewhere, or trying to shut the stable door when it is already too late.

Winston Peters has raised important issues about which many New Zealanders feel very strongly. It is our country, and our children's country. The decisions made now will have a profound effect on future generations.

Don't we owe it to them to get it right?

* Dr Peter Foreman is an Auckland pain management specialist.