Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:743] 
10.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Is he satisfied with the work carried out by his department and in particular the advice he receives from his officials; if not why not? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 Since becoming Minister of Immigration I have generally been happy with the advice that I have received. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Can the Minister confirm that his department raised concerns about the honourable Taito Phillip Field’s immigration representations prior to a visit by a group of Ministers to the honourable Taito Phillip Field’s house in Samoa in March 2005; if so what was the nature of those concerns? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I have been advised by the Deputy Secretary of Labour that she did not raise any specific cases relating to ministerial representations with the former Minister of Immigration. She has advised that long before the visit to Samoa she raised general issues around perceptions of some MPs’ advocacy of immigration cases. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Can the Minister tell the House what advice he has received from his officials on how immigration is helping to meet New Zealand’s skill shortages? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I have recently received advice on immigration decision numbers for the month of November 2005. I was interested to read that over 10000 work visa and permit decisions were made in that month. Those represent a significant input of much-needed labour to help meet New Zealand’s pressing skills and labour shortages. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Which advice is Parliament now expected to believe: the advice the Minister has given the House just now which is that no specific concerns were raised by his department prior to a group of Ministers visiting the honourable Taito Phillip Field’s house in Samoa in March this year or the advice Ms Mary Anne Thompson gave to a parliamentary select committee on Thursday morning last week in which she very specifically told the parliamentary select committee in public that she had raised issues with the Hon Paul Swain around the honourable Taito Phillip Field’s activities; which is the truth? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: There is absolutely no conflict between my previous statement to the House and the statements made by the Deputy Secretary of Labour to that select committee. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How can the Minister tell this House there is no conflict—I have my notes from that meeting right here and as that Minister knows I take careful notes at those select committee hearings—when Mary Anne Thompson told the select committee in public that concerns were raised with Minister Swain by herself over this issue and now the Minister tells this House that specific issues were not raised? There is clearly a conflict there; who is telling the truth? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: Far be it from me to quibble with the meticulousness of the member’s note taking but I reaffirm to this House that the Deputy Secretary of Labour has advised that she did not raise with the former Minister of Immigration specific matters to do with any individual ministerial representation cases. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Did his department alert Ministers following the Hon Damien O’Connor’s reported statement on 14 September that he was “unaware of Mr Siriwan’s employment or activity in Samoa” that the department had actually raised concerns with Ministers at least 6 months earlier? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I am advised by the deputy secretary that any concerns she raised with the former Minister of Immigration were of a general nature and did not relate to that particular case. I do not know how many times I have to assure the member of that. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the Minister briefed on the progress of the inquiry by Dr Noel Ingram QC and if so has he been advised that a number of the key people involved in the honourable Taito Phillip Field’s highly questionable immigration activities are refusing to be interviewed by the inquiry; if he has not been briefed why is he not insisting that he be kept informed of the significant inquiry into the activities of his department and of Labour Government Ministers both current and former? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: No because it would be improper for me to interfere in the progress of a ministerial inquiry.