Sunday, December 23, 2018

'UTU IS SWEET SAYETH THE GREENS'

as they dragged WRP kicking and screaming to sign the UN Compact on Migration remembering back to the dead rat they had to ingest in voting for 'his' waka jumping legislation.

'And count us in with that' sayeth Labour remembering 'his' scuttling of their legislation to repeal the three strikes provisions of the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act.

And clearly Peters' blustering ... trust me 'I'm a lawyer,  I've read the Compact and there's nothing to worry about, doesn't wash with his Party faithful ... go look at the NZF Facebook page for confirmation of that ... and, as for the lawyer bit, well he has a law degree but he's never practiced law beyond being a law clerk in a minor law firm half a century ago; he doesn't hold a current practising certificate and he clearly doesn't know (or chooses to ignore) the fact that it's an offense under s 21 of the Lawyers and Conveyances Act for a person to describe themselves as a lawyer when they don't hold a practising certificate.   'Bush lawyer' at best and not a very good bush lawyer at that.

So, what does the Compact do?    Well, among other things it gives new heart to people smugglers and immigration lawyers because it recommends equal status be given to all refugees and immigrants both legal and illegal. The genuine asylum seeker fearing for his/her life is to have the same status and rights of someone who has paid a people smuggler x dollars facilitate their illegal entry into a country and that's a valuable selling tool for the people smuggler when he pitches his offer.   And it gives new work to immigration lawyers who will be able to argue before the courts that the immigration service has breached in some way, shape or form, the persons rights as set out in the Compact ... that's not me saying that ... it's Crown Law's advice to the government.

Bottom line ... illegal immigrants will find it easier to stay here with their legal fees paid for by the taxpayer.

Some would argue the Compact is non-binding on the nations that signed it and, in absolute terms, that's right. But in signing it you have a moral obligation to work towards its implementation ... if that were not so then you lay yourself open to the charge of hypocrisy and we all know the CoL ain't hypocrites ... are they?

All this from a Party that has dined out on the immigration issue since its inception ... well, actions speak louder then words ... this year has seen NZF sign up to an increased refugee quota; acknowledge that, far from getting Shane Jones' unemployed cuzzie bros off their arse planting 'his' billion trees, they're going to have to import labour from the Pacific Islands to do the work ... and now this.    Their flagship policy is in tatters.   

Forget the Provincial Growth Fund as a source of vote buying shoring up the NZ First vote.   WRP signing the contract is the ultimate betrayal of many thousands of 'his' true believers and won't be forgotten no matter the blustering assurances of their bush lawyer leader. 

Updated ... I see that Angela Merkel is now reported as saying that the countries that signed the Compact could (on an majority vote?) agree to make it legally binding.   So already, with the ink barely dry, the 'Progressives' are looking to up the stakes ... funny that.

40 comments:

David said...

A question worth asking - if controlling borders is so expensive, why not save the cost and have open borders? It worked for the USA late 19C - early 20C. So much of the infrastructure was built by immigrant labour.



Anonymous said...

http://fortune.com/2016/04/17/immigration-open-borders/

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Poor David.

Why not indeed. Back then, the USA had neither welfare nor green stamps.

Further, from the 1880s to the 1930s it's likely any 'greasers' spotted crossing the border might have been shot by the locals gringos.

David said...

Poor Adolf, the Xtian who doesn't believe in Xtianity.

Deuteronomy 10:19

Exodus 23:9

Further, from the 1880s to the 1930s it's likely any 'greasers' spotted crossing the border might have been shot by the locals gringos.

The mark of a true Xtian - hatred of the other. Even when 93% of the "greasers" are Xtians, too. That takes a special kind of hatred reserved only to religion.

RosscoWlg said...

David,

To Answer your question in another way, controlling borders maybe expensive but the alternative of "open borders" is cost prohibitive!

Just look at Europe. Just look at the Arab states!

And by the way USA 18th/19th/early 20th is not the same as USA 21st century.. the world has moved on.


Psycho Milt said...

Utu is sweet sayeth the Greens

Not so! "Coalition government involves compromise" sayeth the Greens. Some people find it more difficult than others.

The Veteran said...

PM ... but some very prominent Greens hold the view 'you' compromised your principles in your support for the waka jumping legislation. I guess principles vs baubles and baubles wins more often than not. You with the waka thing; Winston First on the Compact. Happens ... but there is a price to pay reflected in the polls.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Veteran....old story, you can please some of the people some of the time etc etc etc.

When you have a coalition you compromise, it's working so far in spite of bloggers trying to drive wedges. Will the signing affect NZ in any way detrimental to our way of life.......no. Will it align us with almost all of the liberal democracies on the planet.........yes. There we are....job done with the only long faces in the room sitting in the corner with the Orange one.

The Veteran said...

Yep Egbut ... it's working alright ... for the Greens and NZF ... just look at the polls and look too at which Party now enjoys most support.

FYI ... I understand there have been resignations from the NZF organisation in Northland (such as it 'isn't') over Winston's decision with a least one caucus member distancing himself (clue) from it. Not a lot of happy campers there with their mood matching that of campers in Paihia where the rain is bucketing down as we catch Queensland's Xmas prezzie to us.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

If the small minded minority of what are essentially country bumpkins with little or no knowledge of the outside world choose to throw themselves on their sword over something that has no effect on their lives except for misplaced outrage then far be it from you or me to deter them.

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... those 'small minded country bumpkins with little or no knowledge of the outside world' make up the Party that keeps the CoL in power ... if you're right that's hardly confidence making still, out of the mouths of babes and innocents!!!!!!!

Not that I ever thought of you as either a 'babe' or 'innocent' ... LoL

Wayne Mapp said...

Winston practised law in his own practise in Howick after 1981 until 1984. He has done rather more in the legal profession than you give him credit for.

Wayne Mapp said...

Russel McVeagh was the minor law firm in which he clerked. Even then not easy to get into.

The Veteran said...

Wayne ... then he should know better than to describe himself as a lawyer ... his analysis of the Compact was shonky and ignored Crown Law's advice.

Gerald said...

ignored Crown Law's advice.
This advice???

“The Crown Law Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade have provided legal advice which confirms this UN cooperation framework is neither legally binding nor constraining on this country setting its own migration policies.”

Specifically the legal advice has stated that:

The compact is non-legally binding and does not create legal obligations;
It does not establish customary international law;
The compact should not be taken to give the legal instruments referred to in the text as having any binding effect that those instruments do not already have in international law;
It reaffirms the sovereign right of States to determine national immigration policy and laws and that States have the sole authority to distinguish between regular and irregular migratory status;
The compact does not establish any new human rights law, nor create any new categories of migrants, nor establish a right to migrate.
The compact in no way restricts or curtails established human rights, including the right to freedom of expression.

RosscoWlg said...

Well I guess Gerald it begs the question in the first place if all the above is true, why have a compact?

If a countries sovereign right exists to determine its own immigration policy then the whole thing is just a waste of everyone's time and money.

Oh but then again I understand neither the USA and Australia haven't signed.

Perhaps they are more worried about what now is clearly a dubious institution making changes in the future... basically they are putting the construct in place to do.

So perhaps the USA and Australian lawyers are brighter than ours, or are they just that little bit more cunning about the future intent of the Globalists?

The Veteran said...

Gerald ... no, this advice 'That the Compact may not be legally irrelevant and courts may be willing to refer to the Compact and to take the Compact into account as an aid to interpreting immigration legislation' ... but that's only Crown Law and of course the non-lawyer leader of NZ First knows better.

Note too that while the Compact is not a international treaty and, as such, is non-binding under international law, it is politically binding ... unless of course the CoL choose to disregard that ... but why then would you sign it if you didn't intend to honour it?

All of which I covered off in my blog post.

The fact remains that NZF rank and file are mightily pissed off after having been pissed on by Winston.

Anonymous said...

Well I guess Gerald it begs the question ...

Look at widdle Wosco, twying to sound all gwowed up. I believe we have an ID TEN T problem here, a child who has no basic understanding of English.

Gerald said...

That the Compact may not be legally irrelevant and courts may be willing to refer to the Compact and to take the Compact into account as an aid to interpreting immigration legislation' ... but that's only Crown Law

Source?

The Veteran said...

Gerald .... Crown Law

pdm said...

Snowflake if that was your Anonymous contribution at 12.52pm I can understand why you were too embarrassed to put your name to it.

It was awful.

Gerald said...

nah can't pick it up you got a link?

The Veteran said...

Gerald ... Crown Law advice to Minister Peters dated 17 December 2018 para 3.

Gerald said...

Crown Law advice to Minister Peters dated 17 December 2018 para 3.
Nothing on google. Nothing on Crown Law site search????

Anonymous said...

Probably not unlike his claim that the apologise and withdraw was prompted by a fictitious point of order.

The Veteran said...

Gerald ... suggest you look harder. 6 page letter of 29 paragraphs signed by Virginia Hardy, Deputy Solicitor-General, and Victoria Hallum, International Legal Advisor, MFAT.

Para 2 confirms that the Compact is not legally binding but that it contains 'political and moral commitments'.

It confirms what I posted.

Anon 9.15 ... you can go and get stuffed in a Merry Xmas sort of way.

Gerald said...

Ahh MFAT not Crown Law.
Happy holidays.

Anonymous said...

Don't know why he could not just post this link.
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2018-12/5008076_Advice%20to%20Minister%20regarding%20Global%20Compact.pdf

Anyway Merry Xmas to you Gerald and Happy Holidays to Veteran.

The Veteran said...

Gerald ... on Crown Law letterhead. You would expect MFAT to be involved.



Gerald said...

Thanks Anon. When you read the options not so drastic afterall.
Merry Xmas

RosscoWlg said...

Yep nothing to worry about here then... except

"The director of the Institute of International Law and Institute for Public Law at Bonn University, Herdegen warned the 32-page document, which requires signatories “commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination” with measures including state promotion of “diversity” and opening up welfare systems to all including illegal immigrants, was worded in a way that meant it occupied “a legal grey area”.

“It gives the impression of [state] liability,” he argued, warning that the agreement would result in raised expectations amongst people wanting to migrate from third world countries — a demographic whose population is set to soar in the coming years, with the population of Africa alone projected to double by 2050 to 2. 5 billion."

Interesting that Italy didn't sign.....perhaps being over run with migrants is not as fun as is made out?"

Anonymous said...

The Global Compact reaffirms the sovereign right of States to determine their national migration policy and their prerogative to govern migrations within their jurisdiction..

there yah go fixed.

RosscoWlg said...

Yeah right

The director of the Institute of International Law and Institute for Public Law at Bonn University versus "Anonymous" cherry picking 2 lines out of a document.....

That's an easy one even for Boxing Day

Anonymous said...

AW gee Veteran has been cherry picking from the start.

Noel said...

https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-global-compact-for-migration-to-sign-or-not-to-sign/

David said...

Rather than talking about putting up a fence, why don’t we work out some recognition of our mutual problems, make it possible for them to come here legally with a work permit,” he said. “And then while they’re working and earning here, they pay taxes here. And when they want to go back they can go back.

"Saint" Ronald Reagan.

Guess even old Ronnie is too much of a snowflake for today's Religious Reich.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

David

The difference between Reagan and your idiots is the word 'legally.'

They can come legally now but they all want to jump the queue.

RosscoWlg said...

On the good news front... President Trump has awarded a contract to build the first 115 Km's of the wall in Texas. Of course Texas is a good place to start as there are no Snowflakes there, I bet!!

They are also repairing and rebuilding other parts of the existing wall, which is also good news.

On the bad news front now that I have thought about it, the Australians didn't sign the Compact, so who will they see as the weak link ? You guessed it........ Cindy smiley face and Winston Toad.

Expect tougher immigration policies aimed at NZ..

David said...

No, Adolf, the only one the word "idiots" applies to is you.

Regan went on to say The border, he said, should be open “both ways” — and border security policy should take into account the economic challenges facing Mexico.

And, as we know you love making shit up, and have never read a law in full, there is no such thing as an "illegal" immigrant in US Immigration law - anyone is permitted to apply for residency / asylum, no matter where or how they arrived in the US. THAT, my antiquated friend, is the LAW.

Lord Egbut Nobacon said...

Wiggo.....A Snowflake Democrat contender named Beto O'Rourke came within a gnats whisker of taking the Texas senate in the mid terms. I'm punting him to take a shot at the presidency.

Don't knock the Texans....they ain't stupid and are not all gun nuts who get off on old John Wayne movies, in fact I'm meeting one on Thursday who has just bought a house in France......she wears a T shirt that says TRUMPS REFUGEE PROBLEM