Immigration, Refugees and a Constitution
by Peter Naylor
Unfortunately, in 2050, not all of the world will be a great place to live. While the standard of living is improving in most countries across the world, individuals from some countries want to emigrate and there are some that need to leave as refugees. While employment has changed dramatically over the last 25 years, we still have space in our country for refugees and immigrants.
What has changed is that we have become very specific on what we expect from those wanting to make New Zealand their home, and we make sure that we enable everyone to meet those expectations. These include but are not limited to; a willingness to learn to speak English, a desire to assimilate into NZ culture, and agreement to contribute to NZ society in a positive meaningful way. These are very clearly articulated to anyone that wants to come and live in NZ before they apply.
While there are some skills that are preferred to fill shortages, individuals aren’t only selected based on existing skill sets. Attitude is paramount. Skills can be taught, but changing attitudes is much harder. We have moved away from requiring immigrants to have a certain financial status. The ability to contribute to society is far more important. When an immigrant wants to bring in an extended family member, they need to be able to demonstrate that they can support that member, or they can support themselves, for a minimum of five years. This includes any health costs that the family member may need. If the member is contributing to society then health costs for non-pre-existing, pre-immigration conditions, will be subsidised. This also is similar to any other financial support such as pension or UBI.
We have developed a constitution that is very clear on what Values and Ethics we expect from our citizens, and this is taught in our schools from a young age. Anyone coming to live in our country needs to study the constitution and agree to support it before they can permanently reside here. The constitution protects the freedom of the individual while supporting the rights of society. For example, we support freedom for individuals to practice their own religions, and observe their own customs and culture insomuch as it doesn’t break NZ law or disrespect our culture. For example, women can’t be treated as chattels or religions preached in such a way as to disrespect others' freedom of religious choice.
We have taken a hard line on those who can’t obey our laws or respect our culture and can revoke their residency, deporting them back to where they came from. This is firm and clear before they apply, so shouldn’t be a surprise. It will be up to the innocent associated family members if they choose to stay or go.
The constitution addresses issues such as equality based on gender, neurodiversity, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. It emphasises how we respect and treat each other, not just treating people as we would like to be treated, but treating them as they would like to be treated so long as that is reasonable. For example, some people may like to be treated like royalty and others may be happy being treated poorly if they can treat others poorly, so the constitution has guardrails and guidelines on the treatment of others and self.
a) Aisha, Daniel,Eva
In 2050, New Zealand remains a beacon of hope for those seeking a better life. While the world has seen significant improvements in living standards, some regions still face hardships, prompting individuals to seek refuge or emigrate. New Zealand's doors are open, but entry comes with specific expectations.
Meet Aisha, a young woman from a war-torn nation. She dreamed of a peaceful life in New Zealand. Before applying for residency, Aisha had to demonstrate her willingness to learn English and embrace Kiwi culture. The government had made these expectations crystal clear to all prospective immigrants, ensuring everyone knew what was required. On arriving and learning English she quickly assimilated into society and was quickly contributing to New Zealand. She brought with her an attitude of learning and was able to share some of the experiences of her home country in terms of culture and food with the community she moved into.
Daniel, a passionate educator, had immigrated with his family. His attitude toward teaching and community-building had outweighed his financial situation. New Zealand's emphasis on the greater good had been a driving force in his decision to make the country his new home.
Family reunification remained an essential aspect of immigration. Immigrants were allowed to bring extended family members, but they had to demonstrate the ability to support them financially and cover health costs for at least five years.
Eva, who had moved to New Zealand several years ago, wanted to reunite with her aging parents. She provided evidence of her financial stability and commitment to supporting her family. This approach ensured that family reunification was sustainable and beneficial for all involved.
Carlos, an immigrant with a deep appreciation for freedom, had eagerly embraced New Zealand's constitution. It allowed individuals to practice their own religions and customs while upholding the rule of law and cultural respect. This commitment to shared values ensured a harmonious coexistence.
Marus, who has immigrated with his family, understands the importance of compliance. He knew that adhering to New Zealand's laws and cultural norms was essential to his family's continued residence. This approach protected the country's values and ensured a peaceful society.
The constitution addressed crucial issues such as gender equality, respect for neurodiversity, and the fair treatment of people from diverse backgrounds. It emphasized not only treating others as you would like to be treated but also considering their preferences, as long as they were reasonable. While Marcus came from a country where women were still treated as less than men, he knew that by coming to New Zealand his wife and daughters have equal standing in society. If he disrespects this, he understands that he will be deported and his family will be given the choice to stay or return with him.