ILG, a Rock, and a Hard Place

Written By: - Date published: 6:40 pm, November 8th, 2018 - 91 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, accountability, Deep stuff, Dirty Politics, Iain Lees-Galloway, International, Politics, same old national - Tags: , ,

Immigration Minister Iain Lees Galloway is in a bind. As long as Karel Sroubek remains in NZ, the Minister cannot reveal the full story of why his department’s advisers recommended the convicted drug smuggler be allowed to stay.

National’s Michael Woodhouse, a former Immigration Minister, knows full well that Lees Galloway cannot be completely transparent about the case. Woodhouse would have been in the same situation himself many, many times.

And this is central to the whole issue.

National are cynically manipulating rules they were entirely comfortable with when they were in Government.

Today’s latest attack is the supposed shock revelation that the Minister only took an hour to agree with his officials recommendations. I’m surprised ILG took that long, to be frank.

The way it works for Ministers, board chairs and CEO’s is that they get a report. In that document is what is called an ‘executive summary’, which is the main points of the report in short form. If any questions arise, then the reader dips further into the report. Clearly, this is what Lees Galloway did, and then he endorsed the recommendation.

It is as rare as rocking horse droppings for a Minister to go against advice. Often, when the proposal is rejected, it’s for entirely political reasons; the Minister is scared of a potential backlash.

I’m glad we have an Immigration Minister who can make the hard calls.

There’s no question that Karel Sroubek would normally be removed from the country.

However, he has done something, or offers something, that makes him valuable.

My best guess is that he turned whistleblower a couple of years ago and has done a deal to spill what he knows about drug importation networks.

If part of that deal was that the NZ Government would look favourably on his residency status, then perhaps we should ask the then Minister of  Immigration, Michael Woodhouse, what he personally agreed to.

Or perhaps it’s a question for the man who was Minister of Police in 2015 at the time the Czech Republic indicated it was keen to have Sroubek deported.

Step forward … Michael Woodhouse.

Nah, the Sroubek residency is one the Nats would also have signed off.

And probably already have.

 

 

 

91 comments on “ILG, a Rock, and a Hard Place”

  1. Roflcopter 1

    However, he has done something, or offers something, that makes him valuable.

    My best guess is that he turned whistleblower a couple of years ago and has done a deal to spill what he knows about drug importation networks.

    Or, as read, “I hope it has nothing to do with the PM’s close friendship with one of Karel Sroubek’s closest supporters.” in which Ardern, Sepuloni, Twyford and Sroubek’s supporter Richie Hardcore, hosted an event last year?

    • BM 1.1

      Yeah, think you’re getting close to the real reason, fairly obvious Galloway was instructed to give this guy permanent residency.

      It’s the only reason why he’s so uninformed and lacking in knowledge around this case., no idea how Labour thought they could slide this through without any sort of scrutiny.

      I do wonder if this could be what brings down the government? there’s a real whiff about this.

      • Charlie 1.1.1

        “Bring the govt down”… you must be some delusional nincompoop if you think this pathetic attempt at a hit by National is going to dent the performance of the current government. National are in it up to their eyeballs and are rotting and stinking like a three day old fish.

        • Chris T 1.1.1.1

          ” you must be some delusional nincompoop if you think this pathetic attempt at a hit by National”

          Lol

          Far out

          So no way the Minister is just incompetent then

        • marty mars 1.1.1.2

          + 1 Charlie – well said. This pathet8c bunch of gnat losers will do and say anything to take the blowtorch off their incompetent leader and even worse team including Mr nobodywoodhouse.

          There is obviously things unsaid and unknown here – be great when this can be cleared up.

        • R.P Mcmurphy 1.1.1.3

          you got it right on the nail chas!

        • mary_a 1.1.1.4

          100% agree Charlie (1.1.1) … of course Natz never did deals, did they?

          Kim Dotcom will know all about that!

          Selling list seats for cash, as a favour to wealthy Chinese donors to get their boys and girls on board the Natz corruption train and God knows what else … ??!!

          Probably plenty more slow drip fed revelations over time to come from JLR, via one particular media agent, making Natz very very uneasy!

          Natz not in a good place at present.

      • Gabby 1.1.2

        It’s the CIA BMmer.

      • Incognito 1.1.3

        Instructed by Whom? By the PM? Who found out about the case through the media?

        You’re insulting our intelligence, again.

        • BM 1.1.3.1

          Who found out about the case through the media

          Yeah, that’s the one, hmm who’s this chap Mr Hardcore?

          https://goo.gl/W4iBjX

          The same Mr Richie Hardcore, who was named yesterday as one of those providing testimonials in support of Sroubek to Immigration NZ?

          • Incognito 1.1.3.1.1

            I see, this is how Government Ministers communicate: through the media, and ILG got his ‘instructions’ through a secret message hidden in a rant by HDPA in the NZH?

            I must say, for somebody who likes to insult our intelligence you’re pretty consistent.

      • patricia bremner 1.1.4

        So that is the new meme? ” Bring the government down.” You wish!! LOLz

  2. Pat 2

    ‘immigration Minister Iain Lees Galloway is in a bind. As long as Karel Sroubek remains in NZ, the Minister cannot reveal the full story of why his department’s advisers recommended the convicted drug smuggler be allowed to stay.’

    The Immigration Dept manager was quite clear….no recommendation is made in these cases, it is at the Ministers discretion.

    https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018670414/immigration-nz-on-karel-sroubek-case-we-provide-what-we-can

    from min 3

    • Chris T 2.1

      Sorry Pat

      Missed your post, before posting

      I agree

    • Thanks, Pat. I guess that interview was on the radio while I was writing the post. I would have worded it differently, if I’d heard it.

      However, INZ’s GM does say that officials are routinely with the Minister at the time of making these decisions to answer questions. I suspect it’s likely that one of the questions was ‘what do we do for the best?’.

      But your point stands. No recommendation in the report.

    • soddenleaf 2.3

      The Dutch? warned the National govt, who would have put him on a watch list. So, what I want to know is how the National govt managed to stop that information from getting to the present Minister. As either it did, and there is a very good reason for him staying, but given even a judge wasn’t told… …or this is a National party who stuffed the system up by cut backs. But whichever, the plain fact Is this minister won’t be making that mistake again, so keep him, just take the training wheels off, next I me dumb should mean resignation.

      • Pat 2.3.1

        I have no idea what you are talking about

        • soddenleaf 2.3.1.1

          A foriegn govt, I think Ducth, told the National govt that the boxer was a risk. Authorities must have a watch on him, and so either the present Minister knew and still saw a re ask to grant him residency, or not. If not, the Nats are at fault. If otherwise, the minister has learnt to be more diligent. Or… maybe they are just using him, and always planned to revoke it eventually. I mean drug dealers, mens lives up as a rule, so turnaround.

  3. Chris T 3

    “the Minister cannot reveal the full story of why his department’s advisers recommended the convicted drug smuggler be allowed to stay.”

    Can you please provide a link to this as on the radio yesterday they said they don’t give recommendations.

    It was Galloway’s decision

    Nice try though

    This case had scum written all over it and it is frankly laughable to try to blame others for his lack of seeing it.

  4. ianmac 4

    Lee Galloway said today that yes he spent only an hour or so reading the summary but having since having read the whole file he is satisfied that he made the right call on that information. So there!

  5. Chris T 5

    Oh and Sroubek’s residency was clarified in the first question of question time today.

    First visa was under Labour when he arrived in 2003, residency granted by Labour in June/July 2008.

  6. tsmithfield 6

    “..Minister cannot reveal the full story of why his department’s advisers recommended the convicted drug smuggler be allowed to stay.”

    I don’t think this comment is correct. There was a guy from Immigration interviewed on ZB about a week ago who said they don’t make any recommendations to the minister. They just supply him with the information they have.

    I have heard various theories about him being a police informant etc. But I don’t know that those theories stack up.

    When the PM made her unfortunate recommendation for us to “read between the lines”, the information in the media at that point suggested that Sroubek was in fear for his safety if he went back home. Then it came out in the media that Sroubek had in fact returned home twice. Around that time I remember the PM talking about new information coming to light that needed to be checked. The guy from Immigration that was interviewed also said that Immigration wasn’t aware that he had returned home.

    So, “reading between the lines” it seemed that ILG had concerns that Sroubek might have been in physical danger if he returned home, and that was the reason for giving him residency.

    The guy from Immigration also said this was the first time the case had reached the threshold to be put to any government minister.

    So, previous Immigration ministers haven’t had the opportunity to consider this case.

  7. Herodotus 7

    I think this is the link that has been referred to above – regarding why no recommendation is given
    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/larry-williams-drive/audio/stephen-dunstan-new-details-emerge-from-karel-sroubek-case/
    From last Thursday – The immigration reports don’t make recommendations so as to keep the absolute discretion of the decision maker 2:17 into interview and protects the decision by the minister should the decision be appealed at a later date
    4:00 into interview reason given why this was sent for the minister.

  8. mickysavage 8

    Good post. Associate immigration ministers could have a hundred decisions a week to make. Ministers would have fewer decisions but they would be more complex. And they have the rest of their jobs to do like representing electorates and tens of thousands of citizens.

    Of course they were relying on staff and executive summaries to be briefed.

    And National know ILG cannot confirm or deny anything. The case has judicial review written all over it.

    • Herodotus 8.1

      ButTRP’s case is based on
      “his department’s advisers recommended the convicted drug smuggler be allowed to stay.” and “…Clearly, this is what Lees Galloway did, and then he endorsed the recommendation.” and finally “It is as rare as rocking horse droppings for a Minister to go against advice.”
      From 2links with interviews with Stephen Dunstan – the ministry gave no recommendation/advice as that could have future issues should the case be appealed.
      The minister had absolute discretion; good decisions go unreported – bad decisions are paraded for all to see. But that I imagine that is the life of a politician.

      • I’m happy to accept that there were no recommendations in the report, Herodotus. However, I find to hard to believe that a minister in the company of officials familiar with the case wouldn’t ask what the pros and cons were.

        The very fact that the minister is having to deal with the issue means its a contentious matter and if he is asking questions of the Sir Humphrey’s in the room, that seems to me to be seeking some sort of guidance.

        However, even if the mandarins were scrupulous about what they said, we’re still left with a diligent, rational man making a decision based on the information put in front of him. There has to be a reason for way he went and dollars to donuts Michael Woodhouse knows what it is and why the Minister can’t say a word about it.

        • OnceWasTim 8.1.1.1

          “……………….. asking questions of the Sir Humphrey’s in the room, that seems to me to be seeking some sort of guidance”
          I wish I L-G the best of British luck! You’re correct: “……….we’re still left with a diligent, rational man making a decision based on the information put in front of him.”
          I L-G has had to find out the hard way unfortunately that MoBIE (that creation of Messrs Joyce and Coleman) that sought to industrialise immigration solely on business imperatives, and to prop up shoddy privatised tertiary education institutions, and not necessarily based on an overall benefit to NZ, may not have been such a good idea.
          The previous CEO and Sir Humphrey’s didn’t see fit to properly resource ‘business units’ like INZ, the Labour Inspectorate, or IAA, and we can now see the consequences. Not only the structure was/is wrong, but it’s allowed an organisational culture within that is totally inappropriate to issues surrounding immigration, exploitation, security, scams. There’s another case emerging that’s now involving the SIS
          Hopefully the current CEO is having more luck.
          This is the Ministry that’s brought us countless immigration problems, normalised worker exploitation, shoddy immigration advisors by the bucket load – some with obvious conflicts of interest (making it harder for the legitimate ones), shitty construction steel, radio interference, etc., etc., etc. , oh and btw – Thompson and Clark, “non-racist” demographic profiling………….
          Roll on public service reform Chippie!

        • Dennis Frank 8.1.1.2

          Michael Wood told Duncan Garner this morning that it’s all about following the correct process. I gather that means waiting for the review to produce a result. Calling for the minister to resign before the facts are established is premature, unreasonable, and contravenes the principle of natural justice.

          Seems like nothing has changed in the facts of the issue since this in the Herald eight days ago: ” Voters do accept that sometimes they cannot be told everything. It is tolerated in cases where national security is at issue or there are genuine privacy issues. But there are limits to what they will accept. They generally draw the line when it looks like New Zealand is being hoodwinked by someone with a criminal past.”

          “Prime Ministers do have the power to push the boundaries when required rather than simply accept risk-averse officials’ assessments of what can be revealed. In this case, keeping the truth hidden was almost more dangerous than revealing it — both to the Government and possibly Sroubek. Ardern had invited people to read between the lines. The trouble with an absence of facts is that it is a fertiliser for conspiracy theories to thrive.” https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12152105

          Exactly. Another case of privacy law being used to keep the public in the dark? And from a government that pretends to support transparency in public administration! I suspect there’s a more viable case against the PM than the minister, for mishandling of the issue. Surely the PM ought to be addressing public concern and supporting the minister. “As she has consistently said, she has confidence in the minister, not the decision,” the PM’s spokesman said this morning. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12157201

          If her perception is that the information basis for the minister’s decision was insufficient, in retrospect, fair enough. Why can’t she front the issue herself, and address public concern? Is privacy law really so powerful a constraint that it is stopping her? Should political leaders be thus hamstrung? No, they shouldn’t. They should be able to intervene in media hysteria and explain how government process operates in respect of ministerial accountability.

          Garner told Judith Collins this morning he’d been informed of an internal poll rating Labour at 46% and National at 37%. The PM has a basis to feel complacent. Not enough to avoid fronting the issue, I reckon.

    • patricia bremner 8.2

      Yes this makes sense Micky.

    • Wayne 8.3

      In terms of the format of the file. Yes, there is an executive summary. There are also lots attached documents. Certainly there would have been in this case. It appears the Minister (by his own admission) did not read all the attachments..

      As for the reasons, well we can only speculate, though being a police source is a credible possibility.

      It has always seemed to me that one of the most important qualities of a Minister is to have an “inner warning bell.” ILG says this was his most difficult decision so I guess he has one.

      The problem now is that there is so much speculation as to the reason, is that ILG probably needs to say what it was. Unless Sroubeck has something so deep (in the intelligence area) that it would not be possible to release it. That seems highly unlikely, given his background.

      • Wayne 8.3.1

        Or maybe ILG gives Woodhouse a private briefing as to the reasons. Not unknown for that to occur on a highly sensitive matter, particularly with former Ministers.

      • mickysavage 8.3.2

        The problem now is that there is so much speculation as to the reason, is that ILG probably needs to say what it was.

        Guess who has created the speculation. This is nothing more than an attempt to divert attention away from Ross.

        • Wayne 8.3.2.1

          Not surprising the case is controversial. On the public facts he would be a certain deportation. There has to be something quite unusual in this particular case for that not to be the case. The risk in the Czech Republic is certainly not the reason. The PM’s “read between the lines” was not helpful. As I said in a case like this, maybe the Opposition spokesperson should be bought in much earlier.

      • OnceWasTim 8.3.3

        “As for the reasons, well we can only speculate, though being a police source is a credible possibility.”

        Yes @ Wayne. And perhaps you might tell the pompous Mr Woodhouse that all he’s achieved is to add fire to that speculation in the name of trying to score cheap Trumpian-like populist political points. I ‘spose he’s also allowed a few shock jocks a means to justify to their overlords they’re worthy of their keep, and a few others claiming membership to the 4th Estate to get a bit of an earn from a wordcount (or whatever they measure these things is these days)
        I’ve no doubt Shroubek, or whatever name he’s rides his hoss into town on these days was once a bit of an asshole, and may still be.
        So not only his claim that his life in Czechville could be in danger, but it also could be in ‘lil ‘ole yea/nah Bennettville. (Oh….. and not just Shroubek).
        OR that is possibly not the only reason.
        And as for those ‘inner warning bells’, I think there’s one of those ‘Reaganisms’ that goes along the lines of “Trust but Verify” or something similar.
        Your ilk (perhaps I shouldn’t link you to a certain gNats demographic in the hope you’re actually a bit ethically and morally better, although a fucked sense of loyalty to the brand [National TM] regardless of all and everything has created this bugger’s muddle.
        If I were you, I’d be gently suggesting to the pompous, and to the bitter old-soon to retire, to pull their fucking heads in ‘cos it’ll more likely than not end in tears.

  9. Blazer 9

    ‘ The case has judicial review written all over it.’

    the case has ‘gone by lunchtime ‘ written all over it.

    • Stuart Munro 9.1

      Nah they never do. We’re going to be stuck with Sroubeck, just like we’re stuck with Thiel and Liu/Yan and Yikun and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.

      Successive governments have consistently lacked the spine to draw a line through such people’s improperly obtained residencies.

      Throw him out. Comes here selling drugs? He ceases to be our problem.

      If there’s a good enough reason for him to stay then it’s good enough to be made public. Police informer frankly doesn’t cut it – that’s a consequence of his conviction, not a public-spirited action he undertook spontaneously.

      If he meets the refugee criteria of “a well-founded fear of persecution” motivated by something other than the consequences of his criminal offending – then let’s hear it.

      • OnceWasTim 9.1.1

        “………….just like we’re stuck with Thiel and Liu/Yan and Yikun and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.”
        Actually, I hope we do.
        It should serve as testament and a constant reminder to fucked-up policy, public service failings, egos and the over-ambitious, empire building, public service and ministerial relationships and a whole heap of other bullshit.

  10. JustMe 10

    There have been whilst in government many, many, many poor decisions made by the then National government MP of the time to allowing a person to become a NZ citizen. One ‘Instant Kiwi” happened to assault/beat up his wife. That incident appears to have gone into the ‘lets forget about that matter’ by the now in Opposition National Party.
    The National MPs of today seem to be reluctant to admit they made mistakes and MUST take blame/accountability for the decisions and actions whilst they were in government. In other words National MPs come across as being highly and excessively arrogant. They deem themselves as being impossible of making mistakes.
    Right now National are trying abysmally on their part to paint themselves as being as pure as the driven snow especially when they were in government.
    So whilst it does appear ILG made a wrong decision on allowing this chappy to become a NZ citizen it also high-lights the possibility and probability that even National MPs also made the wrong decisions in granting citizenship to those who were least merit-worthy to be granted citizenship here in NZ.
    But we all know National MPs will never admit to being human because that actually means they have to admit to making mistakes. And we all know National MPs are just so perfect that they deem themselves as sitting beside God.
    Oh to be so perfectly arrogant and not admit they made mistakes. No wonder no-one in their right minds would want to vote National ever again. Especially after recent events when they resorted to blaming Jamie-Lee Ross for being human!!!!!!

  11. Treetop 11

    The National MPs just want to claim another scalp.

    ILG has now read the whole file and the same result. It just goes to show how careful a minister needs to be when making a decision.

    It could go the other way that a minister recieved a file with an error in it and that error causes the person to be deported.

  12. james 12

    3 down …. not bad work.

    • Dirk.Dirkin 12.1

      If National were lilly white yes, but of course National who like to have an opinion on every other party , have whats coming to them any day soon

    • patricia bremner 12.2

      You continue pathetic. Childish James.

    • ScottGN 12.3

      I don’t think National can claim much credit for the downfall of Meka Whaitiri. And it looks like Ardern is digging in behind ILG which suggests that either the PM thinks she can outlast the issue without too much cost or that it’s actually just confined to the beltway anyway. There’s a bit of danger I reckon that National’s overload on the issue is causing the public to tune out….We’ll see I guess.

  13. Antoine 13

    > There’s no question that Karel Sroubek would normally be removed from the country.

    Hopefully followed by Iain Lees Galloway

    • Incognito 13.1

      Yes, ILG should go back to where he came from. Which country did he come from again, Antoine? Was it Kiwistan?

      Another one who’s insulting our intelligence today.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 13.1.1

        Has the look of an unfinished comment; no “A.”

        RWNJs piling in on ILG for his apparent error – anything to shift attention from Bridges’ established gaffs and woes.

        The only way Bridges will be leader of the opposition longer that ILG is the Minister of Immigration is if no-one wants Bridges’ job.

        Judith, the clock is ticking…

        (Echoing Fireblade’s earlier comment @14 – “our thoughts are one.”)

        • Antoine 13.1.1.1

          Sroubek, Lees Galloway, Bridges and Collins, four scoundrels, we can do without the pack of ’em

          A.

        • OnceWasTim 13.1.1.2

          Yep!
          I’m gorgeous too @DMK. My Intelligence Quotient precedes me and my Animal Rat Cunning Quotient lags behind.
          I’m In with the truly In crowd and I’ve never looked in the mirror for more than a few seconds.
          I also spend my time practicing Antwaaaaan to get over my Antoyne lack of sophistication.
          AND I always end my beautious existence with an ……..
          .A

    • JC 13.2

      “> There’s no question that Karel Sroubek would normally be removed from the country.”

      Based on what information A?

      MSM, or was that Paula ….

      https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/375448/convicted-czech-drug-smuggler-karel-sroubek-says-reports-about-him-do-not-present-the-true-picture

      • Jimmy 13.2.1

        There seems to be plenty of info. in the public domain. I would not have needed an hour on the file to decide to deport him

    • Pete 13.3

      I can’t be bothered reading back over days or pages so apologise if I missed something you’ve outlined.

      Exactly why should Iain Lees Galloway be removed from the country?

      • Antoine 13.3.1

        SaveNZ explains it better than I could below

        A.

        • Pete 13.3.1.1

          So because you disagree with his opinion you think Iain Lees Galloway should be removed from the country?

          His knowledge of the situation and whatever factors there are, his being in the seat to make a decision and with whatever other background experience that gives him, is beaten by your gut feeling.

          Do you think it would be better if every one of such cases, instead of being trusted to a minister, should be decided by random public polling – you know, the gut feeling of a lot of the less informed?

          • Antoine 13.3.1.1.1

            > Do you think it would be better if every one of such cases, instead of being trusted to a minister, should be decided by random public polling

            That’s silly! A new minister should be appointed to handle matters of this nature, his/her first act in office can be to deport Lees Galloway.

            A.

            • Pete 13.3.1.1.1.1

              I’m disappointed you really do seem to want him deported. Making a decision you disagree with should at least have him tethered to Seddons’ statue out the front until April 1st. Then deported.

              However, get in touch with the your new minister when she/he’s appointed so you can warn them that the ILG fate awaits them if they make the wrong decision.

              I don’t think the Minister should have to make those decisions or have them left to your tender mercies actually. If the question has to be asked the answer should be no. Extenuating circumstances and humanity are not needed, let them head offshore with the remnants of Lees-Galloway.

  14. Fireblade 14

    All the information relating to this case is not publicly available and a review is underway.

    Everyone has been speculating and making shit up. So my theory is that the National party paid-off ILG to give this guy residency, so National could then use the story to divert attention away from their own internal squabbles, dodgy donations and incompetent leadership. It makes sense doesn’t it?

    It’s just as credible as the storys made up by the right wingers who frequent this blog. Bullshit abounds.

  15. Tiger Mountain 15

    it looks reasonably apparent that the Czech turned snitch, and a deal was done, this cannot be spoken of publicly lest it affect the NZ Police’ ability to credibly recruit future snitches

    Labour really needs to get a hard boiled, ‘unkind’ type of political advisor to handle these types of situations–National attacks–attack back, not make admissions that do not need to be made, as the Minister appears to have done here

    unreconstructed neo libs abound in the top layers of the state sector, and they are not the new Governments friends, if that lesson is not learnt with this case it is unlikely to be

    • Treetop 15.1

      A person turning snitch in this country, they would not last long as no where to hide.

      Maybe the Czech will do NZ a favour and leave. If he has snitched they know where he is.

    • Herodotus 15.2

      If your view has some truth (Reading between the lines) Then why are many in protecting the minister having a go at the Immigration Dept and their briefing/recommendations ?
      I would think (perhaps wrongly) that if he had “snitched” this would have come from Justice or Police ? And if so would not ILG say that we received briefings in this matter over a variety of depts ?

      • Treetop 15.2.1

        A minister is only responsible for their own portfolio.

        Is it possible that ILG has to speak to the justice and police ministers to get an immigration matter right?

        I do not think that ILG is being protected. There are conditions on the Czechs residency.

  16. Ffloyd 16

    ILG should follow bridges example and stop answering any more questions from media. Seems to have worked for Simon when he announced that he had answered questions once on the hit job he and bennett did on Jami Lee and that was it. Not revisiting. So far media seem to have let it drop. Why? That tape was very reminiscent of two buzzards sitting in a tree and one said to the other “patience be damned,let’s go and kill something”. So they went after Jami-Lee The malice and venom in that tape, especially from Bennett is deeply disturbing. So much in there that should be followed up. Tova? Anyone? Bennett and Bridges should step down
    They are not the quality of politicians NZ needs.

    • Rapunzel 16.1

      Exactly and for me I realised what I was waiting for and heard yesterday was Iain Lees-Galloway saying have re-read the initial advice he would make the same decision on based on that. The only thing that needs to be considered now is any further information that would change that decision and how and/or why those event(s) were not made clear – there is also the possibility that earlier decisions regarding the prisoner were set in place in prior arrangements and the details of that can not be public knowledge, probably for a whole raft of legal reasons.
      Further to this already overshadowing exactly what has been going on with the National Party – questions of the donation arrangements, why cases of harassment are being swept under the carpet and why the other MP involved in an affair has not been penalised in exactly the same way as Ross need to be answered.
      the dirty politics from the right continues as Lusk is trying to extend some perceived “deal” with Winston Peters by the “revelation” that there is some connection with NZ First. At the moment anyone who ever spoke to Lusk, was in the same building on the same day as him, or knows someone who knows him etc etc is being accused of being in cahoots with him. Before long no one will be speaking to anyone, I was pretty disgusted that the Herald “beefed” the salacious nature of a story on a paedophile by some earlier association with David Tamihere included in the headline. I make no excuses for criminals but connecting that in such a manner is just more of the gutter journalism NZ is now subject to daily.

  17. R.P Mcmurphy 17

    3 nationals party ministers had this on their desk. what are their positions on this!

    • Naki man 17.1

      Got any evidence of that?

    • Chris T 17.2

      When?

      The bloke came here in 2003. Labour gave him a Visa.

      Labour gave him residency under the false name in early 2008

      He got done in 2009 for false names etc, but got let off, so wouldn’t have gone to the immigration Minister

      Gets done and goes to jail.

      In 2018 Labour Minister let’s him stay

  18. Chris T 18

    The Nat Party conspiracy theories to cover just Galloway’s straight up incompetence, is nearly hitting Jami Lee Ross justification levels.

    Funny to watch

  19. Gabby 19

    What’s the bet the (Iranian?) water purity guy gets slung out because Lazy Galloway has been taught to butt out of government christy.

    • SaveNZ 19.1

      @Gabby, I think I would believe the university lecturers saying his research has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction than bungling immigration and SIS officers.

      Oh and I bet this guy really might be at risk if he went back to his home country but that will not be a factor when they turf him out.

      If only he was a cafe worker or drug lord instead of a qualified scientist doing important research he would be welcomed into NZ immigration arms instead they will chuck him out under false and unproven allegations.

      What a screw up this country has become for immigration.

      Face it, Neoliberalism wants society to go back to serfdom. They throw out the qualified people and give residency exceptions to drug smugglers wanted around the world for crimes and the educational and skill level of migrants moving here, is dropping like a stone.

      • Gabby 19.1.1

        You do wonder who he’s used to savey. In the absence of any sensible communication by the minister, speculation flourishes.

        • SaveNZ 19.1.1.1

          Probably either political aka Dotcom (maybe the guy is from Iran and they want brownie points from the US), or the SIS want to justify their massive amount of public funding increase under the Natz to Labour and need something to justify it, or someone who has the government in their pocket in a special relationship doesn’t want him there.

          Any way, I think the public has no belief that immigration decisions are anything to do with the good of NZ anymore, more personal fiefdom, favours, foul ups, favouritism and funding, driving decision making at the detriment to the NZ public.

        • Pete 19.1.1.2

          In the absence of any sensible communication by the minister, speculation flourishes?

          There is no communication from the minister that would be sensible to some people. They want the immigrant gone.

          The comment has the ring of the current ‘transparency’ about it. Transparency meaning every single bit of detail about this, and anything else being available, nothing being private, nothing discussed being confidential.

          Without that level of information being made available there would be speculation? You mean people (like David Farrar) making things up, posed as questions of course, and putting them about to motivate morons?

          That pathological need to be in the loop and a self-absorbed positioning to trust no-one except oneself would be sort of funny. Except it’s serious.

          Maybe at their next cabinet meeting they can agree that any minister who makes a decision someone in the public doesn’t agree with, should leave the country with Lees-Galloway.

  20. SaveNZ 20

    The guys a liar and convicted drug smuggler. I’m sure whatever he supposedly had or said isn’t worth the risks to the public if this guy is allowed to stay.

    Personally think Iain should go. This government campaigned for reducing immigration, but have failed. The Druglord is apparently wanted in multiple countries for crimes. We have 9000 more on job seeker in September, daily routs against other businesses and employees with people paying for jobs and undercutting other legitimate businesses and lowering standards in areas like construction where NZ already has quality issues.

    Go around NZ and have a look. Not only do the people have a fake job, the standards are dropping daily from bad hotels (I stayed at one with rat bait under the bed and it was supposed to be 4*) to even Fast Food where the staff are out of control ( police were called to McDonalds when someone had pills put in their sundae in West Auckland).

    When our government turns a blind eye to how people are illegally running business around fake workers, interns or whatever the hell they call them, guess what, the public are at risk from people who should not be in that industry!

    Personally would think twice these days about staying in a hotel or eating in a fast food outlet or cafe or resturant because the industry is now rife with fakes and the decent operators are struggling to stay afloat while those who are doing the rip offs are apparently donors to the government (Natz and Labour).

    If tourism is our 2nd biggest earner, not easy to work out that that isn’t going to last with the horrible experiences that everyone gets these days.

    And no doubt in a few years it will come out about all the routs in construction (already happening with illegal workers and lead in tapwear) and again the public will pay the price with their health and safety and financially to rectify issues that robust regulation and training of local workers should have stopped in the first place.

    As for the proliferation of drugs into NZ, tired of the governments pretending to do something but behind people’s backs actually thinking that is ok to import in various drugs, give the drug lords residency and of course NZ youth is probably the biggest losers to the proliferation of drugs much more damaging than cannabis.

    But hey, it helps some drug lord make a tax-free $ here, must be good. (sarcasm) That’s the NZ standard these days this is not exactly and isolated incident as each month there are more and more stories about people being apprehended who have duel residency and committing crimes here against Kiwis, aided by duel residency that clearly should not have been given.

    Get the Druglord out before we have decades of the public paying for his crimes and prison stays and drug rehab for his victims and the victims of those victims.

    • Gabby 20.1

      He maybe should go, because he’s taken a not terribly bad situation and cunliffed it good and proper.

  21. SaveNZ 21

    Oh and the Natz were quite keen to retain convicted sex offenders here… funny how NZ government loves to give criminals residency here, Why don’t they run a campaign 100% pure criminal NZ

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11837608

    Immigration should not be about political point scoring but actually taking the role and policy seriously because something is seriously wrong with how NZ government are engaging with immigration to help neoliberialism.

    NZ is one of the highest per capita in the world for immigration, have some of the biggest welfare benefits for new migrants, and seem to select criminals and fake workers to migrate here while being suspicious of migrants who are well qualified and could be doing important work that helps NZ. If well qualified migrants do get in, often they leave within a few years because NZ has become a work place screw up that intelligent people find difficult to work under http://werewolf.co.nz/2014/12/public-health-the-silent-crisis/

    • Jimmy 21.1

      Yes IMO both the sex offender and the Czech should be on the next plane out. Regardless of political view points, do we want any of these type of people? I certainly don’t want them living in our neighborhood.

    • Ed1 21.2

      I do not recall any confirmation that the the Minister followed the recommendation of the Department, or even of that question being asked. On morning report this morning it was stated that the file was extensive – possibly more than 100 pages; spending an hour of the Ministers time is certainly significant consideration; and Lees-Galloway has now said that after looking at the file again he would make the same decision.

      The Herald article from 2017 is consistent with Winston Peters allegation in parliament that Woodhouse was known for delegating nearly all decisions tot he department. Particularly intriguing in the article was this:
      “Immigration Minister Woodhouse Michael Woodhouse did not comment and Piercey said that because he did not make the decision directly, he “has no legal ability to review” it.

      Whoever makes such a decision has “absolute discretion” and there is no obligation for them to provide any reasons. “

  22. SaveNZ 22

    Part of the 100% criminal NZ campaign. Immigration has done nothing to stop marriage scams happening by changing the laws to stop it under urgency. The migrant charities are asking for help, but maybe they now need to pay a ‘donation’ to government MP’s to get any traction, certainly the migrants who give political parties donations seem to be doing well out of it getting their visas through and making money along the way.

    “A special needs 18-year-old Kiwi woman with the mental age of 7 is targeted by a much older Indian national for marriage in order to get permanent residence.

    An Indian woman who paid thousands of dollars in dowry to marry a Kiwi Indian is now in a safe house after the husband absconded with all her belongings.

    Hundreds of South Asian men are entering into sham marriages for NZ residency and then using their status to extort dowry from women in their home countries, Auckland group Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust says.”

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12123831

  23. SaveNZ 23

    The government needs to grow a brain, and invest in our own kids who are in dire need of help, rather than propping up a scam filed immigration industry, fake educational industry and worrying about migrant criminals welfare (who quite frankly seem to be doing very well for themselves on scamming Kiwis)

    You have to wonder when you see the headlines below, why our government is more interested in making exceptions to helping drug smugglers and their welfare over our own kids who just get weasel words but little help in policy to succeed. In fact all government policy seems designed to screw them over in favour of business and criminal scams and then they wonder why our suicide rate is massive.

    Porirua community demands help after six suspected suicides: ‘It’s just too many’

    What sort of future do NZ youth have, aka expected to get tens of thousands in student debt then asked to work on $40k with no security and little chance of saving or a raise in NZ.. or an unpaid internship with many ‘fighting’ for the unpaid opportunity.

    Our youth are told they are lazy and useless and we need to import in real workers from overseas because they are not good enough…

    or if NZ youth don’t succeed educationally then go figure they can’t compete against that worker who just paid $30k for the job at that petrol station

    so yep, when someone offers them a cheap high of P or synthetic, that our own MP’s granted residency to, of course we have major social problems going forward..

  24. Jum 24

    kiwiblog left out whole dates on their nonsense piece 3 Nov and didn’t note that in 2011, found guilty of passport fraud, that Jonathan Coleman/Nathan Guy didn’t get rid of Sroubek then, along with so many other opportunities they had from 2009 onwards. So why didn’t they?
    Radio NZ, forgot to detail in their timeline – 2012 – that Judge Wade allowed Sroubek a chance because he was thought to be at risk. (Delamere told us that via NewstalkZB). Then there’s the 2010 court documents they forgot about a family in witness protection because of Sroubek and 2 others. So why wasn’t Sroubek tossed out then by Minister Coleman? Was there a deeper reason nobody can mention?
    Having read through quite a bit of media, and quoting this:
    ‘ Iain Lees-Galloway met immigration officials on September 19, and they went through the file they’d prepared for him.
    He says they read through the file summary, and various aspects of the file, but he didn’t read everything.’
    I have some questions.

    1. The immigrations officials went through the file with him. They read the summary and looked and examined various aspects of the file. So he wasn’t in a room by himself; I’m assuming they would have discussed the file. Doesn’t that involve advice? Sounds like a robot would have done a better job of providing proper information to Lees-Galloway.
    He has to rely on whatever the officials give him; is that true? Or, should he just ask Newstalk ZB? Then, he may as well sack his officials if they can no longer be trusted? Yes? No?

    2. How does National zero in on how much time was spent on this? Did an official, meant to be assisting Lees-Galloway, tell the opposition how the meeting went? The national party never ask a question unless they already know the answer. How would they know unless an official had told them. Remember we’re dealing with the suspect world of the MBIE setup (now there’s a word…) under Joyce and co.

    3. Can we even trust the manager’s word that there was never a hint of advice or recommendation given to Lees-Galloway re Sroubek. Sorry, but this doubt is exactly what starts happening when people cannot trust the officials that are meant to be working on our behalf. I cannot imagine an official not advising, nicely of course, that there were dangers, OR NOT, in keeping Sroubek in NZ. Otherwise, the decision would have to hinge on other reasons.

    What day did Sroubek actually get residency back in 2008? Just interested, although he wasn’t found out, name wise, until 2009 and should have been immediately shown the door by then Immigration minister Jonathan Coleman, so why wasn’t he? Let’s see Coleman’s decision file, speak to the officials that were advising/discussing/reading/compiling the file for him.

    BUT, in reality, this is just another case of very dirty politics and we all know it. It goes right to the heart of our rights to unbiased democratic processes.
    Melissa Lee and lack of diary entries by Clare Curran – did she sneak into the MP’s office to look or did an official suggest she should ask that question in parliament, or was it the slug and the official, or was the information just hacked? – Sound like a horror film? Read your Dirty Politics again. It is.

    But the worst part of this ridiculous diversion from the Bridges/Jamie Lee Ross recording, suggesting two candidates were, possibly successfully until found out, trying to donate money to national to get candidacy, is that there has been no thorough investigation into the national mps overseeing Sroubek’s stay in our country, from 2009 when the lie of identity was uncovered. So much for media objectivity.
    The entire stay of Sroubek in NZ should be thoroughly investigated and all the people and decisions involved questioned.
    So, Lees-Galloway should certainly not resign. Ask Delamere. Sroubek shouldn’t have even been here, if he was so bad.
    Meanwhile, Immigration Ministers Coleman (gone,) Nathan Guy and Woodhouse certainly deserve sacking, for their bad stewardship.

  25. JustMe 25

    Right now there are calls by the National Opposition for ILG to resign. I think it’s time the National Opposition actually took a long hard look at themselves and their track record when it came to reports that passed over their desks whilst they were in government.

    How many reports did the various National MPs fail to read whilst they were in government? I mean look at the enormous number of reports that the National government of the day trashed i.e refused to accept there is a problem, rejected there is a problem, denied there is a problem and as per usual blamed the previous Labour government for the problem???!!!!!

    How many reports strangely disappeared whilst there was a National government because the outcome was highly critical of the former prime ministers of the time i.e John Key and later Bill English’s handling of matters? I am referring to Official Informaton requests as being a portion of these Reports. Whilst he was prime minister of New Zealand(or as John Key called this country New Zilland)his office had a cavalier attitude to OI Requests. How many of those requests disappeared into say a conveniently placed rubbish bin because Key didn’t like the request?

    How many National MPs didn’t bother reading the reports because they deemed themselves to hold the monopoly on intelligence.

    There is a biblical verse about a hypocrite needing to remove the log from his(or her)eye before trying to remove the speck from another’s eye. The National MPs are just as much guilty of ignoring and overlooking matters as ILG.

    The problem for National is they deem themselves as being absolute perfection and therefore they sit on the same level as God.

  26. Ross 26

    It doesn’t appear there was any recommendation that Sroubek remain here. Oh and the Minister apparently wasn’t told by Immigaration officials that Sroubek had twice retured to the Czech Republic. His file was several hundred pages long. I suspect that Ministers do not read entire files of that length, but Wayne might like to advise on that point.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/108490175/immigration-new-zealand-explains-how-karel-sroubek-case-worked

  27. Jum 27

    I’ve watched The Nation and the same rubbish is being spouted about Lees-Galloway’s job now on the line. There was absolutely no questioning or discussion from anyone about the various instances when Sroubek should have been deported in the past.

    That, surely, is paramount to why Sroubek has constantly been allowed to stay.

    Ministers Coleman, Guy, Woodhouse should be forced to say why this occured under their watch and if they aren’t this is just another dirty politics slur and again, I have to ask just how much the nasty conditions of key’s time in influencing parliamentary processes and the various media and blog connections (Ede, Lusk, Slater, etc) he had then have remained, especially in areas which are supposedly apolitical public service areas, and are being directed, against Labour MPs,

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts