Is Karel Sroubek a sign of things to come if the government signs the UN’s Global Compact on Migration?

The government’s reluctance to renounce the migration compact, along with its reticence to remove Karel Sroubek from New Zealand, gives a very clear indication of what life might be like under this seemingly non-binding agreement. (Travelling half-way round the world to sign an agreement you do not feel obliged to honour also raises more questions than it answers)

Under the compact, migrants of any sort are entitled to full legal aid and the country’s benefits without discrimination. It all sounds strangely familiar, and the fact that it is only in the last week that most New Zealanders have become aware of the Compact, totally destroys the government’s claim to openness and transparency.

While our media, now, have the opportunity to question the government on its migration decision making, under the compact this could be labelled hate speech and met with the withdrawal of public funds and “Re-training.”

New Conservative supports Mr Bridges on questioning the prime minister on the Sroubek issue.

However, the bigger questions are whether or not this clandestine compact signals the future direction of New Zealand immigration laws, and why the people of New Zealand have been so shut out of the discussion.

ENDS

© Scoop Media