Robson Matt: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Robson Matt: Identity (Citizenship and Travel Documents) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20117] 
Hon MATT ROBSON (Deputy Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 My plea in relation to the four amendments I have proposed to the Committee was: why should we change the 3-year provision now why should we penalise the spouses of New Zealand citizens who could apply after 2 years why should we have the strict conditions of character and fitness etc. and why should we penalise those who may have been on a student permit or work permit and who in the past have shown a good character had a good record and contributed while in New Zealand? That has been my plea. 
I think the exchange between Mr Peter Brown of the New Zealand First Party and myself has been illustrative of this: Mr Brown and I have passports from privileged countries and we did not rush it seems to get New Zealand citizenship. Mr Brown has said that people who come to New Zealand should show an allegiance. Then why does he want to penalise the people who show such allegiance that after 3 years they want to be New Zealand citizens whereas people like him and me did not rush into it? Were we any worse people for not doing that? He seems to be suggesting that other immigrants should show their allegiance. I think that after 3 years they want to do that. 
Let us move to a debate that is going on between Australia and New Zealand now with regard to the rugby league teams. Next Friday we will see the greatest rugby league team in the world. Australia will be here and hopefully New Zealand may knock that team off its perch. What I will do is to wait until half-time to see who is winning and then I will put up my passport depending on which country is winning. My citizenship gives me that privilege. But there is great pressure on New Zealanders who are born in New Zealand but who have been in Australia for a long time since they were little kids to play for New Zealand. There is no suggestion that they have no allegiance to New Zealand. New Zealanders are asking them to come and play for New Zealand. I say to the Committee that we should drop the false and artificial standards of who does have allegiance and who does not and apply the criteria we have applied for so long. 
When people come to New Zealand there is a strict and tough test in order to obtain residence and that is fair enough. It is hard as many members of Parliament will know because they will have tried to help people who have problems in that area. But we should not put up an even harder hurdle for people who have spent 3 years here or 2 years where a spouse is involved or 5 or 6 years on a work permit or who have had a long-term business visa or who have studied for a PhD and married a New Zealander—or whatever their situation may be. With this legislation we are going to spin the process out and make it harder for them. We should think also of the Pacific Islanders—Tongan New Zealanders; Samoan New Zealanders—who have become New Zealanders and who are thinking about joining their family members in Australia. I have seen the heartbreak experienced by people in New Zealand who have families in Australia but who are not allowed by the Australian authorities to join their families because they do not have New Zealand citizenship. How many tragic events like funerals do people want to go to from New Zealand to Australia? Members should think honestly of the people they have given help to; they are many. 
Members should also think of the refugees who have been in New Zealand for 6 or 7 years and are given New Zealand citizenship because we accept as Peter Brown says that they come from war-torn ravaged countries. They have not seen their family they may want to work in a third country and they cannot have a New Zealand passport for another 3 years possibly because the residence period is to increase from 3 to 5 years. They wait 6 years. Why do we want to add to their mental suffering? Why do we want to do that? There has never been a problem in the past. When does the person show his or her wrongdoing? Is it suddenly in the fourth year? Does a person hide in all the years before that that he or she was actually a secret member of al-Qaeda even before it was set up? That is just nonsense. There is no policy reason and no evidence here. If we just return to the question of the children we should ask ourselves why we suddenly want to create a problem when there was never one before and we protected all the children born in New Zealand. 
The question was put that the following amendment in the name of the Hon Matt Robson to clause 4 be agreed to: 
to omit this clause.