Speaker 1: Kiota.
Speaker 2: I'm Chelsea Daniels and This is the Front Page, a
Speaker 2: daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald. The United
Speaker 2: Kingdom is vowing to restore order and control through controversial
Speaker 2: sweeping reform on the country's asylum system. The new interpretations
Speaker 2: of human rights laws will make the UK less attractive
Speaker 2: for asylum seekers and make it easier to deport them.
Speaker 2: The tougher rules on refugee statuses means that people would
Speaker 2: need to reapply and it would take twenty years for
Speaker 2: permanent settlement. Immigration has become one of the UK's most
Speaker 2: contentious subjects. This year, we saw thousands march in vicious
Speaker 2: anti immigration rallies and protests across the country. So at
Speaker 2: a time when on one hand we're seeing prolonged devastation
Speaker 2: in places like Ukraine, Mianma, Gaza, Sudan, we're also seeing
Speaker 2: growing animosity towards those seeking asylum from those wars. Today
Speaker 2: on the Front Page, human rights lawyer and activists Res
Speaker 2: Ghadi is with us to discuss the growing worldwide negative
Speaker 2: sentiment towards those seeking asylum. So, first off, rees, what
Speaker 2: was your first reaction when you saw the latest announcement
Speaker 2: from the UK's Shamana Mahmud.
Speaker 3: For me, as someone who was born as a refugee,
Speaker 3: I think the right to seek asylum is a matter
Speaker 3: of survival, and so when I see politicians and news
Speaker 3: articles like this one, it's really concerning because it feels
Speaker 3: like the issue that should be a matter of human
Speaker 3: rights and protection is manipulated and used in in these
Speaker 3: kind of politicized ways. I mean, especially when we're talking
Speaker 3: about systems that are supposed to be protecting and upholding
Speaker 3: human rights, then using this kind of way to deter
Speaker 3: and to talk about illegal migration and all these kinds
Speaker 3: of narratives that I just I think are not accurate.
Speaker 3: It's really frustrating, and especially for those of us working
Speaker 3: on the ground with people on a daily basis, it.
Speaker 2: Is incredibly frustrating actually, and because of the analysis that
Speaker 2: I've read in the last couple of days is that
Speaker 2: they're facing increasing pressure from the far right factions of
Speaker 2: the UK government. This is a labor party that's actually
Speaker 2: brought these this is Salem Seeker system reforms in and
Speaker 2: it is political because they are taking that because the
Speaker 2: popularity of Nigel Faraga's party and they've decided to go
Speaker 2: ahead with this reform, the biggest reform in decades, and
Speaker 2: some of the things I mean, if we look through
Speaker 2: what it will actually mean for asylum seekers and refugees,
Speaker 2: having to get your status renewed, only being able to
Speaker 2: become a permanent resident after twenty years, and that's if
Speaker 2: your original country is deemed still deemed unsafe. What would
Speaker 2: you say to someone who is looking at these reforms
Speaker 2: and thinking, oh, New Zealand should do the same.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 3: As you've mentioned, some of these reforms that they're proposing
Speaker 3: are really inconsistent with the protections that both the UK
Speaker 3: and New Zealand's have signed up to. They're inconsistent with
Speaker 3: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, They're inconsistent with the
Speaker 3: Refugee Convention, both of these that clearly set out the
Speaker 3: right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution, which set
Speaker 3: out clear definitions of who illegally are considered refugees. These
Speaker 3: instruments are designed to protect people and from the time
Speaker 3: that they were ratified up until today, they are still
Speaker 3: relevant and so putting forward these kind of reforms that
Speaker 3: are inconsistent with the law I think is hugely concerning
Speaker 3: and what I would say, is this idea of like
Speaker 3: a war on illegal migration or the asylum system being
Speaker 3: abused is something that we're hearing in different parts of
Speaker 3: the world, mainly coming from from the rights but it
Speaker 3: has in some way in some countries been able to
Speaker 3: trigger fair from people that don't necessarily understand the systems
Speaker 3: or the processes. And unfortunately that's where we're most at risk,
Speaker 3: when people don't understand and then fall for these kind
Speaker 3: of lines about we need we need to control the
Speaker 3: asylum system or illegal migration has gone out of control.
Speaker 3: What we need to do is kind of fight back
Speaker 3: with the data and the evidence. In particular, in a
Speaker 3: place like New Zealand's, there isn't this concern of overwhelming
Speaker 3: numbers of people arriving on our shores.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're an.
Speaker 3: Island like the UK, but our geographic location is a
Speaker 3: is a really important factor and not a lot of
Speaker 3: people can physically access New Zealand. And then also the
Speaker 3: laws and the administrative processes that are required to arrive
Speaker 3: in New Zealand shores in the first place are much
Speaker 3: more cumbersome, and so the risk of illegal migration in
Speaker 3: New Zealand is really really almost non existent, and if
Speaker 3: it does exist, it is such an inconsiderable number, and
Speaker 3: it is a number that our authorities and system can
Speaker 3: process and handle.
Speaker 1: And it's actually.
Speaker 3: Inconsistent with what a lot of the research and studies
Speaker 3: say around the number of people arriving in New Zealand
Speaker 3: to seek asylum in the first place. So the kind
Speaker 3: of rhetoric that we're seeing in other parts of the
Speaker 3: world don't apply to New Zealand. But also on top
Speaker 3: of that, I think the way New Zealand has considered
Speaker 3: refugee and asylum claims is also at a much much
Speaker 3: smaller scale than the UK and the US and other
Speaker 3: European countries also grapple.
Speaker 4: With the Interior Minister Shabana Machmunt outlined what the Labor
Speaker 4: government calls the most sweeping reforms in decades, which include
Speaker 4: tougher rules on refugee status and new interpretations of human
Speaker 4: rights laws aimed at accelerating deportations. There has been growing
Speaker 4: public concern over immigration and a surge in support for
Speaker 4: the populist Reform UK Party, which is putting pressure on
Speaker 4: the government to take a tougher stance. Ministers say the
Speaker 4: changes will restore control while critics, including some in the
Speaker 4: Labor Party, warn that they risk deepening divisions and weakening
Speaker 4: human rights protections. Let's take a listen to some of
Speaker 4: what the Interior Minister and Shabanah Mackmud said earlier in
Speaker 4: the British Parliament.
Speaker 5: What I have said already on these matters is that
Speaker 5: we have a proper problem, that it is our moral
Speaker 5: duty to fix. Our asylum system is broken. The breaking
Speaker 5: of that asylum system is causing huge division across our
Speaker 5: whole country. It is a moral mission for me to
Speaker 5: resolve that division across our country. I know that the
Speaker 5: reforms I will be setting out later on today can
Speaker 5: fix this system and in doing so can unite what
Speaker 5: is today a divided country.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I saw that in the UK Britain's report, widespread
Speaker 2: satisfaction with the government the cost of living. Obviously, many
Speaker 2: people believe their local areas are housing more asylum seekers
Speaker 2: than is quote unquote fair. What do you think it
Speaker 2: will take for a kind of Does there need to
Speaker 2: be a shift of consciousness here? Will we ever be
Speaker 2: rid of the term us versus them?
Speaker 3: I think there are a number of difference I guess
Speaker 3: factors that are relevant in this regard to it, because
Speaker 3: I think it's the same in the US and the UK.
Speaker 3: There are populations of people that do have these really
Speaker 3: strong beliefs about the numbers of refugees, or what's fair
Speaker 3: and what's not fair, or what's being done that aren't
Speaker 3: really consistent with the data and evidence. Again, but what
Speaker 3: we've seen, especially in the US, and I would argue
Speaker 3: probably similar trends in the UK based on the large
Speaker 3: number of people that we saw show up to protest
Speaker 3: the UK Rwanda deal, is that the majority of people
Speaker 3: actually do not think that there is a massive problem
Speaker 3: with migration or asylum seekers to the extent that the
Speaker 3: media or perhaps the politicians make it out to be.
Speaker 3: We saw, for example, in the US and studies done
Speaker 3: around the number of people that actually think that the
Speaker 3: US refugee settlement program was a good thing more than
Speaker 3: fifty percent. I think the statistics were in the late
Speaker 3: sixty something to seventy percent of people thought that it
Speaker 3: was a good program. And similarly, the number of people
Speaker 3: that have consistently shown up in.
Speaker 1: The UK.
Speaker 3: Do outnumber the people who I think think very negatively
Speaker 3: about asylum.
Speaker 1: Seekers and refugees.
Speaker 3: I think the issue here is also the conflation. So
Speaker 3: we have a lot of people that perhaps if you
Speaker 3: frame the question in a way around protection and fleeing
Speaker 3: persecution and war and you know mass atrocities, are very
Speaker 3: you know, humane in their response and sympathetic, empathetic. It's
Speaker 3: that there is this con you know, conflation of migrants
Speaker 3: and refugees. People believe that refugees who who can show
Speaker 3: a genuine fear of persecution from their countries, and then
Speaker 3: people who may not have the best circumstances or you know,
Speaker 3: opportunities but are not at risk of harm or persecution
Speaker 3: or you know, torture or death as the extreme cases
Speaker 3: may be for refugees in their own countries. And these
Speaker 3: are the migrants. And so there is a different approach
Speaker 3: for people's reactions based on.
Speaker 1: Who those groups of people are.
Speaker 3: But like I mentioned, there is a confusion and not
Speaker 3: all people understand the difference categories. And I think this
Speaker 3: in turn then also I think impacts the policies and
Speaker 3: the responses governments take. There are many governments who now
Speaker 3: believe that's migration or.
Speaker 1: Movements of people is out.
Speaker 3: Of control, and that's something we should think about, you know,
Speaker 3: very carefully. It's true that there are a number of
Speaker 3: you know, a lot, a lot of people that move
Speaker 3: for opportunities who are not refugees, but also that the
Speaker 3: migration system and the opportunities, the visa systems, the pathways
Speaker 3: for legal migration has not necessarily kept pace with the trends.
Speaker 3: You know, we live in a very different world just
Speaker 3: when some of these agreements and documents were created, and
Speaker 3: maybe movement for opportunities and for work wasn't as you know,
Speaker 3: as major, but movement of people has always happened. People
Speaker 3: have always moved for you know, for opportunities, for new lives,
Speaker 3: for better lives, for all sorts of different reasons. Is
Speaker 3: one of the oldest facts of human history. So it's
Speaker 3: something that countries need to grapple with. But it's not
Speaker 3: a matter of stopping, you know, asylum systems or reforming
Speaker 3: asylum systems to address migration, which is something you know,
Speaker 3: quite different and requires different responses.
Speaker 2: And I see all of this talk about asylum seekers,
Speaker 2: and I mean, obviously we live in a time where
Speaker 2: there are multiple wars happening in the world. We've got
Speaker 2: South Sudan, mianmar Gaza, and of course Ukraine just to
Speaker 2: name a few do you think it's I mean, it
Speaker 2: seems hypocritical when when there is such an influx of
Speaker 2: hatred towards those seeking asylum and then at the same
Speaker 2: time cuts to worldwide humanitarian aid on huge scales from
Speaker 2: some of the world's largest powers.
Speaker 1: Absolutely.
Speaker 3: I was in Geneva recently at a un eh CR
Speaker 3: events and they're the High Commissioner for Refugees was talking
Speaker 3: about the Dyer need for funding because they were ending
Speaker 3: this year with a one point three billion shortfall compared
Speaker 3: to last year, a thirty percent workforce reduction, one hundred
Speaker 3: and eighty five officers consolidated or closed. And so what
Speaker 3: we see is in the last two years, global humanitarian
Speaker 3: funding has collapsed more than fifty three percent, and alone
Speaker 3: just from the US's commitments from fourteen billion plus to
Speaker 3: somewhere around three billion. So it's a major drop in
Speaker 3: the global humanitarian funding and what's needed to respond to
Speaker 3: these crises in a lot of these countries actually prioritizing
Speaker 3: funding into defense and deterrence policies. Unfortunately, the problem there
Speaker 3: is what we've seen over many years is that stopping
Speaker 3: people from accessing safety or accessing borders to seek asylum
Speaker 3: does not stop people from moving. It just means that
Speaker 3: they end up in more dangerous routes or taking more
Speaker 3: dangerous risks to try to seek safety. It doesn't stop
Speaker 3: people from trying. It just means that more people die
Speaker 3: in this attempt. So the deterrence policies unfortunately don't have
Speaker 3: the effect that maybe these states policies intend them to have,
Speaker 3: and actually just really really dire.
Speaker 1: Consequences such as we saw recently there.
Speaker 3: We're hangar drowning at sea, you know, the number of
Speaker 3: people that are killed in the process, or in the
Speaker 3: Darian jungle in Latin America, Central America.
Speaker 1: Accessing these paths.
Speaker 3: People don't stop taking these risks to get their families
Speaker 3: to safety. But unfortunately it does mean that more people die.
Speaker 3: And so what I would say then is, on the
Speaker 3: one hand, we know that global humanitarian funding has reached
Speaker 3: you know, probably the lowest point at least in my
Speaker 3: recent memory and perhaps for those even working in the
Speaker 3: field longer than I have. And then on the other
Speaker 3: hand hand, we're reaching unprecedented numbers of people who are
Speaker 3: seeking safety from persecution from these wars that you've mentioned.
Speaker 3: Saddan Mia mah Gazda and there are countless others that
Speaker 3: are not covered by the media in as much detail,
Speaker 3: but they're definitely impacting millions of people.
Speaker 1: People's responses on the grounds, aren't.
Speaker 3: I think for the most part positive when it comes
Speaker 3: to certain certain movements of people or the suffering of
Speaker 3: certain groups of people. But I think again it comes
Speaker 3: down to exposure. There are just you know, some atrocities
Speaker 3: that don't get the same kind of media attention to
Speaker 3: people aren't to where what's happening in those regions or
Speaker 3: what kind of atrocities people are subjected to, and so
Speaker 3: there is like a mismatch I think the reality and
Speaker 3: what people are aware of and then on and I
Speaker 3: think the other end is.
Speaker 1: There can be this kind of.
Speaker 3: You know, people are also facing still very high cost
Speaker 3: of living challenges of affordability, housing crises in their own
Speaker 3: parts of the world and their own backyards, and so
Speaker 3: there can be this kind of us against them mentality
Speaker 3: that again I think it's not helpful because really it's
Speaker 3: not an either or or.
Speaker 1: Mutually exclusive considerations.
Speaker 3: But actually, when we're trying to make systems more ethical,
Speaker 3: more just more fair for all, it's about all of
Speaker 3: these because I think they all have impacts on another.
Speaker 3: If we've got good policies in our own countries, but
Speaker 3: then also our foreign policies are positive and focused on
Speaker 3: development and supporting and global responsibility sharing, then we're going
Speaker 3: to have bitter outcomes across the globe.
Speaker 1: They're not mutually exclusive.
Speaker 3: What happens in one country, whether on the other side
Speaker 3: of the world, still impacts us, whether we're in New Zealand,
Speaker 3: whether we're in the UK, whether we're in the US.
Speaker 1: We just have to, I.
Speaker 3: Think, be a bit more conscious of how interconnected our
Speaker 3: world really is.
Speaker 6: I want to start before we go on to this
Speaker 6: speech from Shibonna my mood and how significant it is,
Speaker 6: Let's look at what came before, because ultimately the proof
Speaker 6: of the pudding is in the eating. Tell us about
Speaker 6: the Danish system, and this is a system that was
Speaker 6: counter to Scandinavian neighbors. It was seen as deeply tough,
Speaker 6: some suggested critics that it was racist. Now appears to
Speaker 6: be amongst some, at least the Golden Boy, the Golden
Speaker 6: Way forward for migration.
Speaker 7: Yeah, thanks for having me.
Speaker 3: So.
Speaker 7: Denmark has had for some time now a sort of
Speaker 7: temporary by default approach to refugee protection it.
Speaker 1: Also does a number of other things. It has departure.
Speaker 7: Centers to encourage voluntary return or failed asylum seekers.
Speaker 1: It has really.
Speaker 7: Strict rules on which refugees can bring in family members.
Speaker 7: They have to be self sufficient twenty four years old.
Speaker 7: And it's also had some very symbolic laws, including most
Speaker 7: famously the jewelry Law, which was brought to in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 7: which means please can confiscate asylum seekers cash or valuables
Speaker 7: to help pay for their stay in the country.
Speaker 2: You experienced actually living in a refugee camp when you
Speaker 2: were younger. Tell me about that and how that's shaped
Speaker 2: who you were today and what you're in your work.
Speaker 3: Obviously, yes, so exactly as you mentioned, people would not
Speaker 3: be putting their families at such great risk if the
Speaker 3: reality of staying home were not more dangerous. And I
Speaker 3: can speak to this from personal experience. My family fled
Speaker 3: at the time of the Kurdish genocide and then faced
Speaker 3: more humans violations and risks to their lives when there
Speaker 3: were refugees in Iran as Kurdish minorities. And then so
Speaker 3: we're forced to flee again, and then this time crossing
Speaker 3: the border into Pakistan. A really unpredictable, uncertain journey, not
Speaker 3: knowing what could come next, but just knowing that remaining
Speaker 3: where they were was far more dangerous than attempting to
Speaker 3: find safety elsewhere. And so my family arrived in Pakistan
Speaker 3: and sought asylum, and they were granted asylum quite quickly
Speaker 3: because of the strong evidence in their case as Kurdish
Speaker 3: minorities who were subject to persecution by not just one
Speaker 3: regime but multiple regimes in the region.
Speaker 1: But unfortunately what was challenging.
Speaker 3: Was the process, so from being recognized as genuine refugees
Speaker 3: with a risk of persecution to then the process of
Speaker 3: actually finding a durable solution or a safety in a
Speaker 3: pathway to somewhere safe. And so my family ended up
Speaker 3: being in Pakistan for ten years, not knowing during that
Speaker 3: entire decade whether they would be there a day longer
Speaker 3: or a year longer, for ten years longer, just unpredictable waiting.
Speaker 3: And so you have these people living in limbo, not
Speaker 3: knowing whether they should settle down and build you know,
Speaker 3: routes and start kind of living as if they were
Speaker 3: going to be there forever, or living temporarily thinking that
Speaker 3: they will be resettled very shortly afterwards. So what you
Speaker 3: get is the people that kind of in between, not
Speaker 3: fully settled but not fully ready to leave either and
Speaker 3: creating these kind of challenges for me. I was born
Speaker 3: in Pakistan when my family had already arrived there. So
Speaker 3: my brother and sister older than me, were already with
Speaker 3: my parents when they arrived in Pakistan. I was born
Speaker 3: in Pakistan, and so you know, lived and experienced life
Speaker 3: as a refugee, not knowing anything different, and so the
Speaker 3: kind of circumstances that I was raised in, not having
Speaker 3: access to school until you know, a lot of protests
Speaker 3: and people in our community were fighting for the right
Speaker 3: for their children to go to school, not having proper
Speaker 3: access to food, water, shelter, clean water on a regular basis,
Speaker 3: the kind of really just limited access to what a
Speaker 3: lot of Kiwis would think is normal or you know,
Speaker 3: something that they would expect to have, not having access
Speaker 3: to those things.
Speaker 1: And then on top of that, the daily protests that.
Speaker 3: Our family and communities would go to because they just
Speaker 3: wanted some sort of clarity on their process and what
Speaker 3: was happening and how long would they be waiting, just
Speaker 3: some sort of certainty. And then in addition, to that
Speaker 3: people dying from hunger strikes because they were just finding
Speaker 3: that it was just too unbearable for them to sit
Speaker 3: and wait, and then taking on these hunger strikes to
Speaker 3: just urge the when and countries to respond to the
Speaker 3: dire circumstances, Seeing children die from preventable diseases just because
Speaker 3: we didn't have the healthcare that we needed, and all
Speaker 3: sorts of really, you know, things that children just should
Speaker 3: should not find is what their daily life looks like.
Speaker 3: I thought those things were normal until I came to
Speaker 3: New Zealand and saw a completely different world. And it
Speaker 3: was only then that I realized the life that we'd
Speaker 3: been living as refugees was not normal and that it
Speaker 3: was extremely difficult compared to the life that many others
Speaker 3: lived around the world. And so that really shaped my
Speaker 3: journey from a very young age, because I had knowledge
Speaker 3: of the denial of rights and basic human needs, the
Speaker 3: unpredictability of life, and also on top of that, you know,
Speaker 3: coming from a Kurdish background, to the genocide and human
Speaker 3: rights violations that my family had directly suffered from not
Speaker 3: having these kind of rights to exist and to just
Speaker 3: be who we are already shaped a lot of my thinking,
Speaker 3: and so I wanted to take advantage of these opportunities
Speaker 3: that I had in New Zealand, a place where I
Speaker 3: grew up, where we had it. You know, when I
Speaker 3: first arrived in New Zealand, we had a female Prime
Speaker 3: Minister who was talking about about things that I had
Speaker 3: never heard before, about the kind of rights that people had,
Speaker 3: and about the kind of you know, the access that
Speaker 3: I had at school and the teachers and the attention
Speaker 3: that gave people.
Speaker 1: So I was mind blown.
Speaker 3: I was like just thinking about what life I had
Speaker 3: and what I had now, and how could I not
Speaker 3: take advantage of it?
Speaker 2: Beautiful, Thank you so much for joining us, Rez.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure to talk
Speaker 1: to here.
Speaker 2: That's it for this episode of The Front Page. You
Speaker 2: can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
Speaker 2: a Herald dot co dot Nz. The Front Page is
Speaker 2: produced by Jane Yee and Richard Martin, who is also
Speaker 2: our editor.
Speaker 1: I'm Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 2: Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for another look
Speaker 2: behind the headlines.