#FreeSpeech

About the United Nations Global Migration Pact

 

What is the UN Pact?

 

The United Nations Global Migration Pact (the Pact) is an inter-government agreement drawn up and directed by the United Nations which asks for commitments from nation states concerning the global migration of people.  The Crown Law Office of New Zealand deemed the Pact non-binding but legally relevant, and suggested that courts may consider the Pact  during the legal process. Here is an excerpt of the Crown Law letter;

3. The Compact is not directly enforceable in domestic legal proceedings. Courts may be willing however to refer to the Compact and to take the Compact into account as an aid in interpreting immigration legislation or policy, especially if this is not clear. But we consider it is unlikely to have a determinative or substantial interpretive impact. In short, the Compact will not be legally irrelevant, but in the event that the Courts consider it, it will be taken into account in a limited way.

23. The Compact does not establish international obligations but given the way the Courts can take account of international obligations, we consider that litigants may seek to use the Compact to advance arguments about the interpretation of immigration legislation or policy.

For a full reading of the Crown Law letter click PDF here to open.

 

 

 

 

New Zealanders have not yet had a chance to participate in a robust democratic discussion about the Pact. There were no calls for submissions, public debate, or referendum. It is only recently, following the horrific and abhorrent terrorist attack in Christchurch, that the Pact is receiving more attention in the mainstream media (MSM). Should not this discussion have taken place last year in the lead up to the signing?

 

When Was it Signed?

 

The document was approved by nation states (including New Zealand) during the Intergovernmental Conference to Adopt the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration on 10 December 2019 and endorsed on 19 December 2018.  Winston Peters announced the signing in the last hours before parliament closed on the 19th December. The Pact has great relevance to Kiwis - it will impact our border security, who comes here, how many, when, and what our commitments toward the “migrants” need to be. Who will pay for this? This question has not been addressed.

 

Our closest allies, Australia and the USA have not signed the Pact. The USA has stated that there are concerns over the Pact undermining sovereignty and how this impacts on their existing immigration legislation.  In many countries there has been untold opposition to the Pact and in Belgium the Prime Minister resigned over the signing of it. The Pact should have been front page headlines, but it has slipped under the radar. The people of New Zealand deserve to know why.

 

 

Read it Yourself Here

The Pact is written in broad, flowery language without any definitive indications of what this will mean for New Zealand - the devil is always in the detail.

 

 https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180711_final_draft_0.pdf  

The full and final UN Global Compact "Agreed Outcome" document is here:

 

https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180713_agreed_outcome_global_compact_for_migration.pdf

 

The Risks

With no indications of numbers, frequency, or detailed implementation we could potentially see tens of thousands of migrants, all needing houses, education and healthcare, descend on our shores in the years ahead.

Take a look at this YouTube Clip and you will see what has happened in Europe after mass migration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYn09wrL9vw

UN Migration Pact Start Collapsing

 

 

What Are the Problems With The PACT?

 

  • The United Nations is an unaccountable and un-elected bureaucracy to the people of New Zealand  

  • There is no defined cap on migration numbers  

  • There is no definition of the term “migrant”  

  • There is no implementation plan regarding funding, infrastructure, resources, e.g. electricity, housing  

  • There is no indication of cost to New Zealand tax payers  

  • There is no discussion regarding redirection of public funding for other government programmes for migration purposes 

  • It is conceivable that the Pact will be used in a Court of Law to defend the rights of migrants 

 

Some Examples of the 23 Objectives Within The Pact

 

Objective 1: Collect and utilize accurate and dis-aggregated data as a basis for evidence based policies (The compact uses the term “data” over 20 times, but provides no data on any of the issues listed) 

 

Objective 5: Enhance availability and flexibility of pathways for regular migration (this implies a well-guarded pathway to existing channels for migration, and could potentially increase and encourage “irregular” migration)  

Objective 15: Provide access to basic services for migrants (No definition of “basic services”, how these services are to be funded, nor a funding cap)  

Objective 16: Empower migrants to realise full inclusion and social cohesion (No guidelines for how this will be achieved, particularly with migrants who are at odds with New Zealand culture. For example, how will the local LGBT community be protected against a migrant culture that is strongly opposed to that community? How will migrants be integrated who follow a political ideology which fuses politics, law and religion? )

Objective 17: Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence based public discourse to shape perception of migration (Shaping public perception indicates propaganda and indoctrination rather than open, honest public discussion) 

Promote independent objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migrant-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising and stopping allocation of public funding of material support to media outlets that systemically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants in full respect for freedom of media (A gag order placed on open and honest reporting regarding migrants under threat of loss of a platform and funding. Who defines xenophobia? – will it be a crime for an ordinary kiwi to have an opinion on what cultures assimilate well in our culture. Should there be a discussion on this?)  

Objective 18: Invest in skills development and facilitate mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences (No quality control of migrant skills and compatibility between country of origin and New Zealand).

 

Objective 19: Create conditions for migrants and diasporas to fully contribute to sustainable development in all countries (No guidelines for length of time nor cost to taxpayer of how this is to be achieved in terms of training programmes, up-skilling and language barrier issues.)  

 

In Defence of the Pact

 

Defenders of the Pact claim it to be a non-legally binding cooperative framework that recognizes no state can address migration on its own due to the inherently transnational nature of the phenomenon. It requires international, regional and bilateral cooperation and dialogue. Its authority rests on its consensual nature, credibility, collective ownership, joint implementation, follow-up and review.  Interestingly already, overseas media are reporting that all the indicators are pointing to the UN declaring the Pact legally binding.

 

The Pact is based on international human rights law and upholds the principles of non-regression and non-discrimination. By implementing the Pact, it is assumed that effective respect, protection and fulfilment of the human rights of all migrants will be supported, regardless of their migration status, across all stages of the migration cycle. The Pact reaffirms the commitment to eliminate all forms of discrimination, including racism, xenophobia and intolerance against migrants and their families. (Page 4, Unity of Purpose) 

 

In our view, some of these terms, for example xenophobia, are so subjective that it is quite conceivable that ANY criticism of migration or immigration for whatever reason, will become impossible (and with legal ramifications).  

   

NZ Sovereignty