National Blog of New Zealand

The recent civil unrest in Thailand brings in to question just how onerous is the duty owed to our citizens abroad, if any.

Michael Jenkins and Tessa Welsh of Morrinsville were less than happy with the level of assistance provided by the NZ consulate in Thailand. Having been delayed by the protests they complain that the $200 loan offered by the government (which would have to be repaid upon their return) was a, “joke”. Mr Jenkins states that, “As of yet we have received no financial assistance and [we] are running up a large debt to keep ourselves going.” Whilst we can empathise with their predicament, travel abroad is inherently risky. There are a multitude of security, legal and health risks when travelling, and it would be cost prohibitive and diplomatically dicey to guard our citizens against all of them. If one happened to travel to Kabul or Baghdad it would be unreasonable to expect the government to provide a contingent of security personnel, the responsibility for your personal safety is your own.

Financial help for kiwis overseas is limited to assisting with access to private funds and transfer of aforesaid, which is an appropriate practice and in line with the majority of other nations including Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Private insurance is available, and advisable for exactly this reason.

Overseas nationals can find themselves in a number of undesirable situations, hospitalised, arrested, lost, detained or even kidnapped – these are risks the NZ government simply cannot guard against. In many high risk countries, where kidnappings and hostage takings are regular occurrences the government may have little or no presence. The risk must be borne by those who choose to venture to such areas. That’s not to say the government shouldn’t assist in any way possible, just that there should be no expectation of help.

I submit however, that organising physical extraction and logistical support where circumstances change extraordinarily rapidly due to political upheaval, war, environmental disaster and the like is good practice. The risk of travel can only be assessed where those risks are at the very least remotely foreseeable, and ensuring the physical safety of our citizens in wholly exceptional circumstances ought to be an ideal held high.