If truly in love, she could move to India?

July 5th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

A couple’s age gap of nearly 40 years is being cited as one of the reasons New Zealand declined an Indian man’s visa application – a move he says is “ageist”.

Balwinder Singh, 22, met New Zealander Glyn Kessell, 59, at a hair salon in Glenfield last year.

The relationship started with texts, progressed to “intimacy” within three weeks and then marriage two months later.

And just by coincidence he wants residency?

I think Immigration should be suspicious of any marriage that occurs within three months of meeting. And it is not ageist to consider a difference in ages. It is common sense.

Immigration NZ area manager Michael Carley denied the decision was ageist or racist. It was made “after an extremely detailed and thorough assessment, which included visiting Mr Singh and his wife at their home and interviewing them both”.

“The couple got married after an uncommonly short three-month courtship. It was noted during a visit to the couple’s home that their living arrangement appeared to be akin to a boarding situation.”

Not surprised.

He said Mr Singh could take the matter to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal should his appeal to Immigration NZ fail.

He might be deported if the tribunal decided against him.

But if this is true love, I am sure Ms Kessell will be happy to move to India so they can be together.

Tags:

20 Responses to “If truly in love, she could move to India?”

  1. kowtow (8,319 comments) says:

    The west needs to get serious about third world immigration.

    taxpayers are being taken for a ride and it doesn’t help the unemployment situation.

    But when you’re ruled by politicians and bureaucrats obsessed by equality,quotas,multiculturalism and image there ‘s very little the taxpayer gets out of the deal.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. anonymouse (710 comments) says:

    Oh and look who the immigration “consultant” is …

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Changeiscoming (184 comments) says:

    Actually being married has nothing to do with getting residency in NZ now. You simply need to prove that you have been living together for 12 months.

    Speaking from personal experience as Christians my wife and I choose not to live together before marriage so she couldn’t get PR until we had lived lived together for 12 months. Even though she had been in NZ for years on a student visa and then work visa. She could stay in NZ on a work visa for the 12 months. I am sure if this guy had a work visa he could stay on that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. KiwiGreg (3,246 comments) says:

    If genders were reversed wouldn’t even be a story.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Mark Thomson (80 comments) says:

    If marriage were a purely private matter I might agree with DPF on this. But a marriage license is issued by the state. If that has any meaning at all then I think the state has an obligation to grant anyone it has issued that license to all of the rights that go along with married status, without subsequently asserting a magical ability to read their minds. If you think there is something dodgy about the relationship, the time to make that determination is before the license is issued, not after.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. PaulL (5,965 comments) says:

    @KiwiGreg: the story isn’t “young man marries older women.” The story is “visa denied because of age difference.” I think the story has been placed by the immigration consultant in the hopes of gaining sympathy. I actually think older woman/younger man is more likely to gain sympathy than the other way around.

    To run a stereotype, I think many NZers think poor thing, she’s found love late in life and now the evil govt is denying it. Whereas if the genders were reversed most people would be thinking dirty old man, taking advantage of a young woman who just wants citizenship. Although even that is a stretch, I think most people can read between the lines of “living in a situation like a boarder” and have no sympathy at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Griff (7,516 comments) says:

    Last time I was offered an Indian princess she included a bonus eight grand plus two years of sex and slavery just for nz citizenship.
    The Thai ones sometimes include a trip home to see the family In parts of Thailand they still have a bride price.You pay a fridge for the bride and do the whole local marriage thingy. She pays you for the citizenship.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. KiwiGreg (3,246 comments) says:

    2 PaulL fair enough. Although I think the visa is denied because they dont think it’s a real marriage (maybe same thing). I remember some friends going through this and the questions were quite detailed – what present did you give on anniversary etc

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. James Stephenson (2,153 comments) says:

    what present did you give on anniversary etc

    This being a trick question, any genuine husband would never be able to answer this :D

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. davidp (3,580 comments) says:

    From the linked article: “It was noted during a visit to the couple’s home that their living arrangement appeared to be akin to a boarding situation.”

    The law doesn’t grant permanent residency on the basis that your flatmate is a NZ citizen.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    Typical stereotype there Gwiff…a fridge for a thai bride , idiot. Ever been to Thailand Gwiff ? No didn’t think so. Infact you’ve probably never even left the country. A trip away for you would be down to the local caravan park at the beach with your big bummed wife and transistor radio.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Viking2 (11,412 comments) says:

    suddenly we are concerned?
    Well it’s been going on for years.
    Tongans marrying Maori ladies to gain citizenship.
    Had a few in my rentals.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. J Mex (187 comments) says:

    Anyone see the photo?

    “Now could you just put your arm around her for the photo…”

    –holds shoulder with closed fist–

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10894878

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Cactus Kate (551 comments) says:

    The marriage is no more arranged or of convenience than many others including that of his own culture.
    I say if people are willing to humiliate themselves by entering such an absurd institution as marriage then let them in. The marriage itself has probably the same odds of surviving as many others out there with more politically correct age gaps.
    The man child looks more than capable of supporting himself and earning an income.

    As for the lady. Good on her. Bet Christmas with the family is fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Griff (7,516 comments) says:

    liarbors a joke

    wanna buy a bride

    Bet you five grand I can supply you with a princess.

    India ,Pakistan , Fiji or Thai?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Rajiv (30 comments) says:

    Hello Sirs and Sirrees,

    It’s amazing how this Herald news story has grabbed people’s attention. Let me dig in and then try to give you a rational evaluation.

    This news story (accompanied by the couple’s picture) has all the elements to provoke and scandalize— Here we read about a 59 year old White New Zealander female being in “intimate” relationship with a 22 year old brown man of foreign origin (If he was a Maori or Pacific Islander brown man, it may not have raised such concerns since that kind of interracial “intimacy” is usually tolerated in New Zealand).

    Second, yes, as Gregg pointed out, if the genders were reversed there would be no story. To unpack this statement– if it was a 59 year old White New Zealander male being in “intimate” relationship with a 22 year old Indian girl, it would not engender such concerns or provocation.

    Now, let’s resort to reason in order to make sense of this. Hypogamy– that is, improving one’s lot through a marriage alliance– is what human beings have always done in all human societies. Marrying someone who is attractive, healthy (read better gene pool) and successful is hypogamy as well, regardless of a couple’s claims that they married just because they “fell in love”.

    This hypogamy is always a factor– to varying degrees– in most marriages that result in one spouse getting a “residency” of the host country. In all honesty, I know enough White New Zealanders–both male and female– who have married foreigners with a view to gaining an Australian passport, American passport or an EU passport. Do we ever read blog posts mocking their Green Card marriages? Rarely.

    That said, yes, many foreigners ALSO enter into deceitful love and marriage alliances and marry the citizens of a host country for residency ONLY. Soon, after the foreign spouse gets residency, he or she ends the marriage and flies away leaving the Citizen Spouse lonely, high and dry (Pun intended).

    There must be better safeguards to prevent that kind of exploitation of the romantic Lonely-Heart Citizens. But, as someone pointed out, immigration laws already stipulate that man and wife must stay together for at least 24 months before residency is granted to the foreign spouse. During the probation period the foreign spouse is granted a temporary work visa only.

    In summation, in accordance with the law, this particular “couple” must be given the benefit of doubt because eventually it is not how we or immigration officials “FEEL” about a case that matters but how the law is applied. The law clearly states that a New Zealand citizen’s spouse is allowed to stay in the country (if he or she meets health, character and $$$$ requirements), first on a 24 month probationary work visa. Then, after two years, if the relationship endures without raising any due suspicion of fraud, the foreign spouse is granted a permanent residency. That’s the just and fair law.

    These two Love Birds in the Herald news story are perfectly within their rights to stay together in New Zealand at least during the probation period. The “age” and “cultural differences” objections sound not only prejudicial but also idiotic. (If they indeed needed an excuse to reject the application they should have come up with something better than this!)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. gump (1,634 comments) says:

    DPF – I know that your blog headline is intentionally bombastic, but it seems a bit presumptuous to suggest that Ms. Kessell could simply move to India.

    If NZ isn’t prepared to accept Mr Singh’s application for a residency visa, then we can’t assume that the Indian authorities would accept a visa application from Ms. Kessell.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Rajiv (30 comments) says:

    For people who may not have the attention span to read my long comment and others who think I am just being silly, I would like to qualify my comment and elaborate on where I’m coming from.

    I strongly adhere to Libertarian and Liberal democratic principles.

    As such, this couple in the Herald story must be free from societal judgment or unfair government interference as long as they mutually wish to be together.

    But of course, the two must also operate within the legal framework. Therefore, the onus of proving the validity of their marriage to Immigration New Zealand falls on them. They should further prove the validity of their marriage by staying together over the 24 month probationary period. As long as they can do that, it is nobody else’s business to judge their relationship or marriage.

    Leave the kids alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. joy120380 (1 comment) says:

    Hello Rajiv do you have email address i wanna ask something as i think you have broad knowledge about the topic.
    thanks

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Rajiv (30 comments) says:

    I’m not sure if I have a “Broad Knowledge” about something that I don’t know about yet.

    But you can email me through this contact page: http://rajivthind.weebly.com/contact.html

    Cheers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.