Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:635;Page:6291] 
3.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Does he have confidence in the New Zealand Immigration Service; if so why? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 Yes because it is a hard-working and conscientious department. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Why were the applications for work visas by Mr Sunan Siriwan and his partner Ms Phanngarm declined because as the Minister told the House yesterday a processing immigration officer felt they should be declined rather than because former Associate Minister of Immigration Damien O’Connor had reversed his direction of 23 June 2005 to grant Mr Siriwan and Ms Phanngarm work visas? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The then Associate Minister reversed his decision by requiring that he be contacted before any visas for the return of Mr Siriwan or Ms Phanngarm were issued. When applications for visas were eventually lodged Ministers were advised in accordance with the reversal decision. Ministers directed the department to process the applications on their merits. A senior immigration officer in the department then determined the applications in accordance with normal procedures and on the basis of current facts and circumstances. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Why were the applications for work visas for Mr Siriwan and Ms Phanngarm declined on the grounds that the 6-month eligibility period granted by Mr O’Connor had expired when such grounds for declining their application would not have even been relevant if Mr O’Connor had in fact reversed his decision of 23 June 2005 to grant the work visas? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I can confirm that the department did not decline the applications because the 6-month window had expired; rather it determined that the earlier but now expired ministerial direction could no longer form the basis of any grant. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How can we reconcile his claim to Parliament of 26 July that Mr O’Connor had acted to reverse his decision of 23 June 2005 to grant Mr Siriwan and Ms Phanngarm work visas with the statement by the Department of Labour’s manager of operational support that there was an absence of any direction from the Minister or Associate Minister after 23 June 2005? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: The flag was not mentioned in the 31 October letter to Mr Suriwan’s lawyer because it was irrelevant. It was an internal administrative procedure that had already been satisfied. The letter of 31 October was responding to an application. [ 
Interruption 
] I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I am in the process of trying to give the member a frank and detailed response to his question but his colleagues do not seem to want to hear it. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. As the member knows interjections are permitted. There was no barracking during the answer but would the Minister please continue. [ 
Interruption 
] That is not a funny comment and the member will be leaving the Chamber if he makes any other such comments. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: When the 25 September application was received the department referred the issue to me in keeping with that flag. I then requested the department to make a decision based on normal immigration grounds. Ministers have not instructed the department in any way as to the substance of that decision. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Why if Mr O’Connor had reversed his decision of 23 June 2005 to grant work visas for Mr Suriwan and Ms Phanngarm was the deputy secretary of the legal division of the Department of Labour unable to answer a question from the  
New Zealand Herald  
as to precisely what action Mr O’Connor had taken to reverse his decision and instead referred the question to the Minister’s office? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I can confirm that when a journalist asked Dr Brash whether demoting Dr Smith was because he was an embarrassment— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry. Would the Minister please be seated. The Minister will be leaving the Chamber if he does not sit down when I am on my feet. That was not an appropriate answer. Would the Minister please address the question. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: I have no specific knowledge of the particular conversation to which that member refers. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: What has changed in Mr Suriwan’s and Ms Phanngarm’s cases other than the fact that they have been exploited by a Labour MP Taito Phillip Field that makes them ineligible for work visas now when last year former Associate Minister Damien O’Connor decided that they should be granted work visas? 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE 
: As it is still possible that this case could be the subject of further ministerial appeals it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the substance of the decision. However I can say that it is clear from the Ingram report that Mr O’Connor was not fully informed of all the facts when he made his decision.