Stanford said she “totally reject(s) that”.
“The reason this change came around was because of the Jaz brothers.
“They’ve been here for more than 10 years but have committed heinous crimes and I think any reasonable New Zealander would expect that if you don’t abide by the laws of this country, that it is time to leave.
“Now I know there are some commentators saying it’s a ‘Trojan horse’ or something else – they could not be further from the truth.”
She said the country had “the softest touch” and the changes would bring New Zealand in line with comparable countries.
Danny (left) and Roberto Jaz were convicted in 2023 of drugging and violating more than 20 women at Mama Hooch. Photo / George Heard
Stanford said while citizenship couldn’t be rescinded under normal circumstances, there were many people who held dual residency.
“When you hold residency we are perfectly within our right to remove that if you have committed a crime within a certain time of being in New Zealand.
“We are extending that time out and saying it is a privilege to live in this country and you must abide by our laws.”
McClymont said the changes weren’t a crackdown on criminals and the “devil was in the detail”.
The announcement has coincided with a debate in Australia about deporting a New Zealand-born leader of a white supremacist group who has Australian citizenship, and comes alongside statistics released on Thursday estimating there are 20,980 visa overstayers in New Zealand.
“The minister would like us to believe that this is all about making it easier to deport criminals – and that’s exactly the way the media has reported it,” he said.
“But really that’s bit of a Trojan horse because Immigration New Zealand already have these powers.
“This idea that you can deport someone for a criminal offence who’s been here less than 20 years is disingenuous because most people who become residents become citizens after five years.
“So the devil is really in the detail.
“It’s not really about deporting criminals, it’s about deporting people who have committed other minor immigration infringements and who are being blamed and punished and then deported for it.”
Noting the current debate in Australia, McClymont said it wasn’t possible to deport a citizen or someone with dual citizenship in New Zealand.
He said the language around expanding the definition of when a visa was granted in error was confusing, and he was concerned that people with jobs, family and community connections in New Zealand could be deported.
The proposed law changes were introducing legislation “by stealth” that would enable the deportation of people for “simple immigration administrative mistakes, for example”, he said.
McClymont dismissed the number of overstayers as negligible and said while increased penalties for migrant exploitation were a good move, he wanted to see greater scrutiny of immigration policy.
“Where is the examination of how the immigration policy enables the exploitation in the first place – how agents and employers can sell vast numbers of job tokens offshore to con vulnerable migrants into paying for these jobs – where is that?”
– RNZ