Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since Dec 15, after an amendment to immigration law in Australia, New Zealanders are the prime nation to have their nationals 'removed from Australia' , not necessary on committing a crime (it used to be more than a year in prison) even, but on character grounds alone can a person now be removed.
Over 1,300 NZ nationals, some here since infants, have been removed since the date given. (Dec 15)
Interestingly, New Zealanders are now, by far, the main nationality held in Australian detention centres. Before the amendments to the immigration laws, NZ's were not even in the top ten group of nationals held in detention.
The changing events have brought down the ire of the New Zealand government. Only nine Australians have been deported from New Zealand, over recent years.
There does appear a greater 'chill' in relations with New Zealand in more recent times. The two governments are of course polar regions apart on the ideological front.
Former PM's Howard spray the other day with regards to the establishment of the government (Coalition with New Zealand first) shows the growing antagonism between them though probably more behind the scenes.
Since Dec 15, after an amendment to immigration law in Australia, New Zealanders are the prime nation to have their nationals 'removed from Australia' , not necessary on committing a crime (it used to be more than a year in prison) even, but on character grounds alone can a person now be removed.
Over 1,300 NZ nationals, some here since infants, have been removed since the date given. (Dec 15)
Interestingly, New Zealanders are now, by far, the main nationality held in Australian detention centres. Before the amendments to the immigration laws, NZ's were not even in the top ten group of nationals held in detention.
The changing events have brought down the ire of the New Zealand government. Only nine Australians have been deported from New Zealand, over recent years.
There does appear a greater 'chill' in relations with New Zealand in more recent times. The two governments are of course polar regions apart on the ideological front.
Former PM's Howard spray the other day with regards to the establishment of the government (Coalition with New Zealand first) shows the growing antagonism between them though probably more behind the scenes.
I'm not getting into the who's right and wrong of all this, but the two countries are far more different than folk from North America and Europe seem to believe. Yes, you see a lot of evidence of Australian culture and commerce in NZ, but five minutes off the plane and you start noticing a lot of differences, from the ethnic make up of the population to how people interact. Watch NZ TV and the difference in 'world view' is quickly apparent. But given how different their histories have been, particularly since the years of the great depression, why would it be otherwise?
Well the real kicker here is the ability to deport a person, whom has committed no crime, purely through association. Yet nobody picks that up. Hence further down the track, anyone whose politics the government doesn't agree with could in fact be deported. Where does such a 'watering down' of the law, through an amendment end?
As for above post, indeed a deportee can be a day old when arrived in Australia and returned 'home'. At least in this case, it is to an English speaking country. Spare a thought for one I recall, deported to Sweden, a country he had never seen since emigrating at two years of age, hence unable to speak a word of the language.
As it stands one can be out of the country 'on holiday' and refused remittance.
Well the real kicker here is the ability to deport a person, whom has committed no crime, purely through association. Yet nobody picks that up. Hence further down the track, anyone whose politics the government doesn't agree with could in fact be deported. Where does such a 'watering down' of the law, through an amendment end?
As for above post, indeed a deportee can be a day old when arrived in Australia and returned 'home'. At least in this case, it is to an English speaking country. Spare a thought for one I recall, deported to Sweden, a country he had never seen since emigrating at two years of age, hence unable to speak a word of the language.
As it stands one can be out of the country 'on holiday' and refused remittance.
That is crazy. Far fewer Australians are deported from New Zealand.
That is crazy. Far fewer Australians are deported from New Zealand.
Indeed . But remembering the massive difference in numbers of citizens in one another's country being a point as well. None the less, New Zealand having only deported 9 persons of Australian citizenship over recent years (one assumes all for serious offences) this is indeed a very much one sided affair, one to which New Zealand has every right to express dissatisfaction about.
I'm not getting into the who's right and wrong of all this, but the two countries are far more different than folk from North America and Europe seem to believe. Yes, you see a lot of evidence of Australian culture and commerce in NZ, but five minutes off the plane and you start noticing a lot of differences, from the ethnic make up of the population to how people interact. Watch NZ TV and the difference in 'world view' is quickly apparent. But given how different their histories have been, particularly since the years of the great depression, why would it be otherwise?
There are differences between the two countries, but I wouldn't say they are that big. The relationship is changing though, largely due to immigration from different countries.
I think the Aussie deportations do highlight one of the differences, and would like to think that NZ wouldn't stoop so low as to the level of some of the Aussie deportations -even in the 1970s and 80s, public outcry was enough to reduce the level of deportations back to Pacific nations, and that involved people that had no legal right to be in NZ.
There are differences between the two countries, but I wouldn't say they are that big. The relationship is changing though, largely due to immigration from different countries.
I think the Aussie deportations do highlight one of the differences, and would like to think that NZ wouldn't stoop so low as to the level of some of the Aussie deportations -even in the 1970s and 80s, public outcry was enough to reduce the level of deportations back to Pacific nations, and that involved people that had no legal right to be in NZ.
The WWII experience was vastly different for the two countries as well, as was the collective experience of their post WWII immigrant populations, both helping to shape very different perspectives on international issues.
The WWII experience was vastly different for the two countries as well, as was the collective experience of their post WWII immigrant populations, both helping to shape very different perspectives on international issues.
How was the war experience different between the two countries?
Japanese submarines sunk ships even in Sydney harbour, and major sea battles like the battle of the Coral Sea were fought not far from coastal Qld towns, while the Japanese army advanced to with a few hundred km of mainland Australia.
New Zealand's experience was comparatively benign.
In the post war period, Australia took in far more refugees and displaced persons from the conflict. As an example, this is an interesting insight into Australia's Jewish community: https://www.theage.com.au/national/m...20-ge5v5v.html
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
