Roche Denise: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2720. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENISE ROCHE (Green): I rise to take a short call in the Committee of the whole House stage on the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2). I want to say from the start that I support everything that Sue Moroney the previous speaker has just said. We have to acknowledge that there is some goodwill towards the Government for putting forward this bill because it is an attempt to address the exploitation of migrant workers. I also agree with the previous speaker that the way the Government has gone about it is not good enough. So we will not be supporting this bill.We recognise that migrant workers are some of the most vulnerable workers in Aotearoa New Zealand. As the previous speaker explained a power imbalance in the employment relationship for workers exists under the current situation but when you are a migrant worker it is even more of an imbalance. We are now in a situation with our industrial relations environment where workers are becoming increasingly vulnerable. They have less say less power and less ability to negotiate and when you are a migrant worker this is a problem that escalates by about tenfold.The labour market is becoming increasingly swamped with migrant workers and we are increasingly concerned at the amount of exploitation that is occurring. As outlined by the previous speaker in terms of the situation in Queenstown the Government’s actions in welcoming low-paid workers into the country is having an impact on the ability of New Zealand workers to be paid anything above the minimum wage. What is happening in effect is that many employers are using migrant workers to force down wages so that wage costs become less and less for the employers which is all very well for the employer but in terms of what it is like for workers it makes it harder for people to make a living and it makes it harder for them to make ends meet.It is also really bad for local economies if you are relying just on low-paid migrant workers as is the case in Queenstown. What it means is that local families are not able to afford to live in the areas and you get the situation—which we seem to be heading for on Waiheke Island where I live—where we are actually importing low-paid workers to get the hospitality jobs done because nobody can afford to live there because they are not being paid enough.We see the Government’s attempts to bring some sanctions against employers who are migrants themselves as a step in the right direction. It is a nod in the right direction but we do not believe it goes far enough. The bill still does not address the fact of—or offer any protections for—migrant workerswho are themselves being exploited when they blow the whistle.Quite recently I dealt with a very sad case—and I want to thank the Minister of Immigration’s office for its support and assistance in this issue—where a woman was faced with deportation basically because although she had come to New Zealand to work in a specialist job at the request of the employer who was a migrant themselves who had received residence as soon as she got to New Zealand she found out that the job she had been given had changed. It was changed at a whim. So instead of being given a specialist job she was being asked to clean. Not only that she was on very limited hours and was on call so it was basically a zero-hour contract. She was also paid the minimum wage.Within a couple of weeks she had talked to her employer and said that she needed to earn enough to be able to live here and she needed to do the work they had brought her over here to do. She was sacked immediately and within a month or two her employer had actually dobbed her in to Immigration New Zealand so her work visa was revoked. When she came to see me she was facing deportation and at that stage she was also receiving assistance from an advocate in the employment relations field. While she was still trying to avoid deportation they took the issue through to mediation with the Employment Relations Authority through the mediation service with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment.The employer admitted that they had failed her in terms of providing what was supposed to be provided in the employment agreement that she had agreed to—and signed for that matter—and they agreed on a settlement. But that settlement made no impact at all on the fact that her work visa had been revoked. So she received no protection whatsoever for being able to identify the issue that there was a rogue migrant employer—an employer who was not treating workers fairly and who was exploiting them. Raising that issue led to her being deported from New Zealand despite the fact that she did receive a settlement through our labour relations laws. She was basically left in a situation where the settlement that she received was spent on her ticket back to her home country.This is a very sad state of affairs for any worker but particularly for this woman when she and her family had been looking forward to coming to New Zealand settling here and contributing to our economy. It is not an easy thing for workers or anybody to make that decision. We know from people in this House who have migrated here themselves that it is not an easy decision but it is one that shows they want to contribute as much as they can to this economy and this society. To have that taken away from under her feet in a very unfair way was just incredibly sad and there was nothing we could do about it.This bill does not go any way towards trying to address this issue. It does provide sanctions against employers who may be acting unlawfully themselves but it does not protect the workers. I agree as well with previous speakers about the powers of immigration officers. I absolutely agree that these matters should be transferred to labour inspectors because essentially we are looking at workplace relationships that have gone sour. Immigration is an area where migrant workers feel very very vulnerable and that at any moment they could be deported and their visas could be revoked. So to place them in a situation where they will be investigated by immigration officers with extended powers is to increase their vulnerability.So we will not be voting for this bill. We understand that it is an attempt to try to address the situation of exploited workers but it is not going to do that. I would like to see this Parliament operating in a way that does actually fix the problems that come to us. Thank you.