INL DIGITAL EDITION March 15, 2020

14
MARCH 15, 2020
Businesslink
Shane Jones’ attack hurt Indians but aimed elsewhere
Peter Dunne
There should be little surprise
at Shane Jones’ latest racist
outburst against Indians
living in New Zealand. The
typically florid, bombastic, pompous
comments were, by his own admission,
aimed neither at the Indian
community, nor the vast majority of
the rest of the country, but rather at
just the small percentage of it that
identifies as supporters of the New
Zealand First Party.
After all, they have had a tough
time in recent weeks defending the
apparently indefensible way their
Party funds itself, so might welcome
the Party making the headlines for
other reasons.
Electoral cynicism
What better way therefore to
make the Party troops feel positive
again than trotting out some good,
old core message rhetoric as light
relief.
No matter the offence the
comments understandably and
justifiably caused the Indian
community, because although they
were the group attacked, they were
not the group at whom the remarks
were aimed. Playing minorities off
against the rest of the population
in this way is a classic New Zealand
Shane Jones
(Newsroom Photo by Lynn Grieveson)
First tactic and is the height of
electoral cynicism.
But it is also much more than
that. It is a blunt expression of New
Zealand First’s beliefs.
Moreover, what it really shows
is that racially motivated criticisms
by New Zealand First MPs are not
just some casual occurrence to be
brushed aside as “their personal
views.”
There have been too many
instances of this type of behaviour
over the years for them to be dismissed
credibly as just coincidence.
Rather, they are at the heart of
New Zealand First’s monocultural,
anti-immigrant message, which the
Soft approach hardens criminals
to reoffend
Dr Parmjeet Parmar
This week we have seen the
government’s soft on crime
attitude has hit an all new
low.
For a start, Corrections released
a prisoner on bail after he staged a
hunger strike for 25 days.
Instead of dealing with the
offender inside prison, Corrections
took the easy option.
As a result, we now have a
recidivist offender with an extensive
criminal record living in our
community.
Dangerous precedent
Corrections has set a dangerous
precedent and has essentially
opened the floodgates, what will
prisoners try next to force Corrections’
hand?
What is even worse is that the
prisoner himself did not even think
that he should have been released.
What does that say about the state
of our justice system under this
government?
This is just one example of the
Government’s soft on crime attitude
filtering down, and this time, it is
Corrections reacting to it.
No voting power please
If releasing a prisoner on bail
because he went on hunger strike
was not bad enough, then the
government introduced a Bill that
will allow prisoners to vote.
Losing the right to vote is a
consequence of serious offending,
and National has been very clear
that we will oppose any change to
the law on this.
It is difficult to be sentenced to
prison, and you have to have committed
serious crimes to get there.
Prisoners who have received
sentences of up to three years are
not petty criminals.
They are people who have committed
serious assaults, robberies,
family violence and sexual offences.
Losing the right to vote is consistent
with the loss of other freedoms
when going to prison.
Once offenders come out of
prison and have re-joined society
then they have this right returned
to them.
Going to prison is a punishment,
it should be treated as such.
Instead, this government is intent
on making it seem like a holiday,
even releasing prisoners early if
they become too difficult to deal
with.
Bad example
But with this sort of behaviour
happening, it is no wonder other
criminals are feeling emboldened
under the current Government.
We have seen a sharp increase
in gang membership as well, since
October 2017 almost 1600 more
people have joined gangs, with this
number continuing to grow.
It is making excuses for drug use,
we saw last year that drug dealers
who could prove their addiction
caused the crimes could receive
a 30 per cent discount on their
sentence.
If you commit a crime you should
not get off easily.
This is not fair on victims. They
have not asked to be put in this
position and we should be putting
them before criminals.
National has always been very
clear, we unapologetically stand on
the side of victims, and a National
Government would ensure victims
feel as though they have received
justice.
It is becoming obvious at the
election this year there is a stark difference
between a Labour, Greens,
NZ First soft on crime Government
clearly on the side of offenders,
and a National Government that is
tough on crime and puts victims at
the heart of our justice system.
Dr Parmjeet Parmar is a Member
of Parliament on National List
and the Party’s Spokesperson for
Research, Science and Innovation
and Associate Spokesperson for
Economic Development.
Party is unashamed and unabashed
in promoting.
It is a deliberate pitch to that
segment of the population that
holds similar views.
A habit for New Zealand First
One only need recall Winston
Peters’ quarter century of attacks
on non-white migrants; former
deputy leader Peter Brown’s
outburst that there were too many
Asian immigrants coming to New
Zealand; former MP Richard
Prosser’s references to people
from “wogistan,” Ron Mark telling
a Korean born MP to “go home,”
or Clayton Mitchell’s anti-Semitic
comments in Parliament.
The list goes on and on. Shane
Jones is no different – he is just
playing the same old tune his Party
has scratched out for years.
But it is not just the frequent
attacks on foreigners and their
values that mark New Zealand First
out as racist. It has also been the
Party most consistently opposed
to correcting Treaty of Waitangi
imbalances, or enabling greater
power-sharing with, or public
participation by, iwi in the nation’s
life. New Zealand First has always
opposed moves in this direction
as encouraging separatism, an anti-social
justice and equality tactic
frequently employed by white-supremacy
groups elsewhere.
Deliberate race card
New Zealand First has consistently
and deliberately played the
race card in New Zealand politics
like no other Party in the last quarter
century. And given its electoral
success in that time it has to be
conceded, sadly, that the strategy
has succeeded.
Unfortunately, its overt racism
has legitimised the latent prejudices
of a small group of New Zealanders
who have supported New Zealand
First as the public expression of
their own private bigotry. And, at
three of the eight elections held
under MMP, that support has been
sufficient to put the Party in a key
position which it came to government
formation.
Battle for survival
However, this year, the Party is
locked in a real battle for political
survival.
There are steady signs that New
Zealanders may be tiring of the
New Zealand First presence in
Parliament. But, as previous elections
have shown, the Party often
performs best when its back is to
the electoral wall. And it does so by
playing to its traditional appeals.
Therefore, during this year’s
election campaign, all ethnic and
cultural minorities are likely to
be targets of some type or other
of New Zealand First’s hostility, if
it considers that fomenting such
division is in its selfish political
interests.
After all, it has worked for them
in the past, so why would it not do
so again.
Unfortunately, therefore, any
hope that New Zealand First will
moderate its racism in the slightest
in the lead-up to this year’s election
seems likely to be extremely
forlorn.
Ironic and incredible
All the while, it is becoming
increasingly ironic and incredible
that the Labour Party, which
professes itself to the world as
progressive, compassionate and
kind should be propped up in office
by such a regressive, racist coalition
partner.
Sadly, while National has already
reduced New Zealand First’s
relevance for the future by ruling
out working with it, Labour is too
electorally reliant on New Zealand
First’s potential numbers to do
likewise. And with the Prime Minister’s
do-nothing response to New
Zealand First’s racist attacks likely
to continue, the country seems set
to endure yet more ignorant and
intemperate outbursts from Shane
Jones and his colleagues over the
next few months until the election,
when a majority of New Zealanders
will have the opportunity to finally
put an end to this racism in politics
once and for all.
Peter Dunne was a Minister of the
Crown under the Labour and National-led
governments from 1999
to 2017. He lives in Wellington.
Money transfer firm fined $2.55 million for
money laundering
Supplied Content
Jiaxin Finance Limited, assisted
by its owner Qiang Fu and his
mother Fuqin Che, have been
convicted of offences under
the Anti-Money Laundering and
Countering Financing of Terrorism
(AML/CFT) Act.
Between April 2015 and May
2016, Jiaxin Finance and its brokers
were responsible for remitting
over $53 million into New Zealand
for an international customer.
The charges
Jiaxin Finance failed to conduct
customer due diligence and failed
to report and keep records of
suspicious transactions relating to
this customer.
Ms Che also separately
structured transactions to try to
avoid the application of AML/CFT
requirements for this customer.
She did this by making 14
separate cash deposits totalling
$710,772 into his New Zealand
Image from 123RF
bank account. These payments
were spread over a period of
four days and made at different
branches of the bank.
On March 3, 2020, in the Auckland
High Court, Jiaxin Finance
was sentenced to pay a fine of $2.55
million. Mr Fu wad sentenced to
pay a fine of $180,000 and Ms Che
$202,000.
First criminal action
AML Group Director Mike Stone
said this is the first time criminal
action has been taken under
Ex-council employee pleads
guilty to graft
Supplied Content
A
former Auckland Council
employee has pleaded
guilty to a corruption
charge brought by the
Serious Fraud Office (SFO).
Sundeep Dilip Rasila (42)
admitted accepting a $7500 bribe as
council employee in the Auckland
High Court on February 26, 2020.
Mr Rasila was employed by
Auckland Council as a Procurement
Relationship Specialist at the time
of the offending.
His counterpart, Sunil Chand (56)
also pleaded guilty at the hearing.
The charges
He gave Mr Rasila the kickback
in return for his company being
awarded an Auckland Council
contract valued at $140,150. The
contract was for the supply of
22,000 USBs of various sizes.
Mr Rasila and Mr Chand were
remanded on bail to reappear for
sentencing in the Auckland High
Court on 12 May.
Sunil Chand gave Mr Rasila
a $7,500 bribe in return for Mr
Chand’s company, On Time Print,
being awarded an Auckland
Council contract valued at $140,150
(excluding GST).
Crimes Act offences
105 Corruption and bribery
of official: (1) Every official is
liable to imprisonment for a term
not exceeding seven years who,
whether within New Zealand or
elsewhere, corruptly accepts or obtains,
or agrees or offers to accept
the Act by any of the AML/CFT
supervisors.
“We worked closely with Customs
and Police to piece together
the full picture of the extent of the
offending. Money-laundering is a
global issue, and unfortunately it
does happen here. An estimated
$1.35 billion from fraud and
illegal drugs is laundered through
legitimate New Zealand businesses
every year. The true cost and social
impact is much higher.
“It is vital that businesses know
what to look for and report suspicious
activities or transactions.
Most businesses we supervise
want to do the right thing, but
when a business intentionally
fails to comply with its AML/CFT
obligations, we will take strong
regulatory action.”
For more information visit our
website www.dia.govt.nz/AML-
CFT-Homepage
Source: Department of Internal
Affairs, Government of
New Zealand
or attempts to obtain, any bribe
for himself or herself or any other
person in respect of any act done or
omitted, or to be done or omitted,
by him or her in his or her official
capacity (2) Every one is liable
to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding 7 years who corruptly
gives or offers or agrees to give any
bribe to any person with intent to
influence any official in respect of
any act or omission by him or her
in his or her official capacity.
GET THE NEWS
YOUMISSED!
EVERYWEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY!
Subscribe to the
Bi-WeeklyNewsletter.
IT IS FREE! IT IS EASY!
Write nowtovenkat@indiannewslink.co.nz