(1), that Australia’s policy of revoking the privilege of non-Australian born from remaining in Australia, when that person has committed serious crime in Aussie, in my opinion, lacks any credible legal foundation.
“Turn the planes around and make a point to the Australian Government that New Zealand is not the dumping ground for your criminals” and the argument that Australia allowed these people to become gang members and should therefore, carry the costs, is facile
When a non-New Zealand born person commits crime in this country, they are subject to the same outcome as is served up by Australia. Furthermore, I suspect that there is no country where this “return to sender” rule, does not apply.
“When in Rome, do as the Roman’s do”, is the appropriate maxim.
I do however, share the concern of National Maori Authority chairman Matthew Tukaki, that the influx of a criminal element honed to the higher level of gang violence in Australia, does present a big problem for New Zealand.
The claim from the side-lines for more police, more resources, is understandable, but this too borders on banal.
NZ Police have more personnel than the military. NZ Police have virtual unlimited powers when to comes to drug crime and use of firearms. More police and more powers, is not the answer.
What is required is a better utilization of powers, resources and personnel.
In my assessment as a former detective, AOS member and inspector in charge of Auckland Criminal Intelligence Unit, I provide two examples of below standard “service” delivery by police:
Police intelligence units failed to deliver the level of information evaluation they should have, prior to the Christchurch massacres.
Police misuse of major police resources was manifest in the Dot Com raids – which were ultimately deemed unlawful by Judge Winkelmann.
Accordingly, police must lift their game in the field of intelligence gathering and evaluation and with this better quality of material, they must avoid gung-ho show off behaviour and ensure they comply with the law and reasonable use of force.
Reasonably use of force.
As a front-line inspector, I was armed 24/7. I was shot at with a shot gun. I also faced down bandit with a sawn-off shot gun (2) so have some idea of the “issues”. CIB patrols on my Section were also 24/7 armed.
Today, Police already have firearms secured in cabinets in the boots of their standard patrol vehicles, and are carried by front line C.I.B personnel and front-line commissioned officers.
In my view, as I explain in two recent posts: “Gangs and Guns” (2) and “Time to arm police 24/7” (3) the environment has changed dramatically over the past few years.
Therefore, in my view, it is not a quantum leap for better utilization of resources to arm all police 24/7.
Arming 24/7 police will be a massive psychological boost to front line police and more importantly, I believe it would give the wider public an I infusion of confidence that something was being done to deal with a problem few New Zealanders will not have recognised.
The key to this irrevocable step however, will be to address the disturbing lack of credible legal scrutiny of police killings – and this aspect is also addressed in the bibliographical links: (2) (3) (4)
Arming police 24/7 is not the “silver bullet” (excuse the pun) for the gang problem.
There are white gang members. There are Pacific Islands gang members. And, there are Maori gang members. All will ultimately come into contact with the police.
However, Maori prison population is disproportionate to their ratio of population. To deny this or label the claim as racists, might be the refuge of many WOKE brigade. But as PLATO once said:
We can easily forgive a child
who is afraid of the dark;
the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.
In my view, Māori must turn to their own communities to begin to address the level of gang criminality.
It’s time for Maori to take back control of the destiny of their people. For too long, too much State “assistance” over too many decades, has eroded too much Maori self-reliance. Maori communities must reassert their influence – among their people – and not as the Government attempts to do; indoctrinate the rest of NZ against their will.
Having Maori lineage need not be an impediment.
As I’ve penned before (5), Rt Hon Winston Peters Llb, Hon Clem Simich Llb and I, each of whom have Maori pedigree and who hailed from the same lower socio-economic rural rump of NZ, made it – without State Aid. As have many others.
From my observations, persons of Pacific Island heritage have very strong community bonds, preserved via church affiliations and a determined effort to retain their cultural values. These communities do not seek to be elevated by law, above all others. Perhaps there is a lesson here?
Ross Meurant, graduate in politics both at university and as a Member of Parliament; formerly police inspector in charge of Auckland spies & V.I.P. security; currently Honorary Consul for an African state, Trustee and CEO of Russian owned commercial assets in New Zealand and has international business interests.