Deportation drive leaves bitter taste

AUSTRALIA’S round-up of New Zealand offenders for deportation starts, like much of that country’s immigration policy, with an understandable premise, and ends up closer to cruelty.

Of course, as a rule, countries ought to be able to deport non-citizens who commit serious crimes.

And, yes, New Zealanders who make their lives in Australia should do so with their eyes open; they should know they aren’t quite as secure as everyone they live alongside, just as they should understand that their adopted country will not provide them with certain basic protections, such as social welfare, if they are struggling. In this way, Kiwis in Australia should take the same care as those living anywhere in the world.

And yet New Zealanders across the Tasman aren’t in the same situation as they would be anywhere else in the world. Where else would it be possible to arrive aged 4 and still be living, legally, aged 23, without any permanent residency or citizenship?

That was the status of Junior Togatuki, who died in custody last month after begging the Australian immigration minister Peter Dutton to reverse the cancellation of his visa. An inquiry into his death is under way.

Togatuki had spent a lot of time in prison and doesn’t need to be romanticised. Neither do most of the other New Zealanders caught in the crackdown. There are much more heartbreaking stories in the Australian detention centres – especially of the abuse and suffering of children.

And yet, despite their crimes, the New Zealanders’ situation leaves a bitter taste. Why should prisoners who have already served their sentences be forced to remote island prisons for more time in purgatory (the average stay is more than a year)?

Why should people whose crimes are years old, who have gone back to their communities, be sent back to a country they can’t remember? They shouldn’t, and the Australian system should have more scope for discretion.

Change seems unlikely. Prime Minister John Key reports having a ‘‘blunt’’ conversation with Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. Yet successive governments have protested about Australia’s benefit cancellations, without result.

Meanwhile, Australia’s Dutton defends the policy: ‘‘If people are doing the wrong thing, whether they’re from New Zealand or any other country, they can expect to . . . be sent back.’’

Welcome to the Australian immigration complex, in other words, which has little regard for hard cases – for those people who are Australian in all but name, for those who migrated or committed their crimes decades ago, or for any other mitigating details.

This deportation trawl probably wasn’t meant for New Zealanders, but 80 have so far been ordered to go, and another 180 are in detention centres. One Australian lawyer thinks 5000 may fit the criteria for being sent home.

For decades, the substantial freedom of movement between the two countries has been a boon for both. But it has also left many Kiwis in Australia in a kind of official limbo. Unfortunately, Australia seems happy to exploit that hazy status.