Robertson Grant: Immigration Bill — Second Reading 
Robertson Grant: Immigration Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1605] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 We have heard a great deal this evening about some of the more contentious elements of the Immigration Bill and I will address those shortly. I start by saying that there are some elements of this bill that I think a lot of people around this country—universally around this country—will certainly welcome which are around the whole issue of simplifying the visa system that we encounter. As a relatively new MP I can say that certainly in my electorate office the overwhelming number of cases I get are around the immigration issue. They are always emotional. They are emotional because we are dealing with people’s lives—with their very existence in many cases—and the fact that they want to be in a country such as New Zealand where they feel safer and more secure. They want their family to join them in many cases because they want their family to continue to stay together and have an existence that is safe. It is always going to be emotional and there are always going to be contentious elements in immigration policy. 
We need to have a balanced immigration policy. We need to have rules that allow flexibility but also uphold rights. It is a very difficult balance and we can see by the work the select committee did that there is an awful lot of material here to work through to ensure that we have that balance right. But it is difficult. We are looking to build a world-class immigration system in this country. In order to do that we have had to have another look at the overall policy settings. A simpler visa system that means that visas permits and exemptions will all be rolled into one system is something that will be welcomed by applicants. 
I would also say it will be welcomed by the public servants who administer this legislation. I know that here as the representative of Wellington Central the public servants in the Department of Labour who work in the immigration section have had a very difficult time in recent years. In general they are people who work extraordinarily hard and they are people who know they are dealing with people who have been in some of the most difficult circumstances we can imagine. It is a very difficult role to play. I pay tribute to some of those immigration officers—both here in New Zealand and overseas—who face that daily challenge of balancing the different elements of protecting New Zealand’s borders but also of working with people from fragile existences people who have severe humanitarian concerns. I think we all as members of Parliament know from our interactions with the immigration system that it is not perfect. It is certainly something that could do with being improved. But the people who work in it have the best interests of New Zealand at heart and indeed of the people who want to come here I hope. 
Another element of the bill that people throughout New Zealand will be happy to see is more flexibility in terms of making positive exceptions to residence policy. One of the most time-consuming things I have seen even in my short time as an electorate MP is people having to go through multiple hoops over and over to get what seems on the surface to be a relatively simple exception granted. I think we can see in this bill that there is now a simpler process for that. We have already heard mentioned tonight the people who came off the  
Tampa 
. I also am working at the moment on behalf of some of those people. As a country we have to be proud of the fact that we have stood up in the past and said we will bear our fair share internationally of those who end up at the margins and fringes of society. We need legislation that can support our ability to respond flexibly but also continues to protect our borders. I say tonight to the National Government that it must continue to take on that responsibility when that time arises. We know that when Helen Clark—as my colleague Clayton Cosgrove said earlier tonight—took the gutsy call to take those people from the  
Tampa 
 into New Zealand there were people in the then Opposition who are now in Government who opposed it. I call on those people today to rethink that to ensure that we can continue to play that role internationally as they now have charge of immigration policy. 
Speaking of international considerations one of the other things the bill does is create a more robust international protection system. That really means that New Zealand is now going to be able to say under things like the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that we are acting consistently. This is important because again our immigration policy is part of how we are seen in the world and it is important that we are seen to be upholding those international conventions. I know that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee dwelt on this area as well and made some changes and that is important. I know again that some of the things that people are asked to prove when they come to New Zealand are very difficult to prove and occasionally have been seen to be inconsistent with international law. This bill brings us into line and improves that situation in a way that will provide a better and more sustainable immigration system going forward. 
Another element that it is important we mention is the single independent appeals tribunal. There were four appeal authorities; they will now be amalgamated into a single Immigration and Protection Tribunal. Again that is vitally important because there are too many hoops too many different processes for people to deal with. They are confusing processes that I think we have managed to simplify here and that is a really important element of this bill. 
There was a huge consultation process around this bill. There were 650 people who submitted before the bill even came into the House 4000 written submissions and 67 oral submissions when the select committee heard the bill. It is important that New Zealanders have had the chance to have that say. We have also heard tonight from the Minister that some amendments will be introduced at the Committee stage and I have no doubt from the speech we heard earlier from Dr Norman that other amendments will be also introduced at the Committee stage. I look forward to debating those because the contentious issues in this bill are contentious as I said before for a reason—these are emotional issues. I will mention briefly the ways in which the select committee has dealt with some of the concerns that have been raised. 
We have heard about the concerns about classified information. It is important that we acknowledge tonight that one of the changes is that a summary of the classified information will now be provided to the person who is the subject of it. That was an important amendment made by the select committee and it is important that we put on the record tonight that it has been made. There will no doubt be further debate about the use of classified information. It is a very difficult area but it is one where the select committee building on the bill has tried to balance how that information is used who has the ability to use it and what the person who is the subject of it knows about it. Biometric information is another area that is contentious and difficult. Again the committee has made some changes. Privacy impact assessments will be done by the Department of Labour they will be publicised on the website and the Department of Labour will consult with the Privacy Commissioner on that biometric information. That again is important because it will give New Zealanders some confidence that safeguards have been built into this legislation. 
At this second reading I can say that there are some elements in this bill that I believe all New Zealanders will like. It is a simpler system—a system that keeps us in line with our commitments internationally. I acknowledge that some other elements are contentious but I think that the select committee has done a good job under Mark Gosche’s leadership in trying to bring some balance into those elements and I look forward to further debate on the bill.