Turia Tariana: Immigration Bill — First Reading 
Turia Tariana: Immigration Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:11243] 
TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Madam Speaker. Tena tatou katoa. Sometimes when Maori Party members come into the House and we hear people talking about these issues we wonder how much those people understand of the history of this country and the history of immigration. When we hear talk about “fitting into the culture” and “values of this country” we feel as tangata whenua that that is something we would have loved to see happen but did not experience. 
This legislation is clearly targeted at people of colour people who do not come from Western-speaking countries. I think that is appalling. 
 The Immigration Service has produced a pamphlet for migrants that features a statement that I believe provides an apt context for both migrants coming to Aotearoa and members coming to this Immigration Bill. This comment comes from the Hon Justice Taihakurei Edward Durie and is as follows: “The Treaty of Waitangi is not just a Bill of Rights for Maori. It is a Bill of Rights for Pakeha too. It is the Treaty that gives Pakeha the right to be here.” Maybe we sometimes need to be reminded of it. 
The challenge issued by Justice Durie is to remind us all that without the Treaty there would be no lawful authority for a Pakeha presence in this part of the world. He describes Pakeha as tangata Tiriti—those who belong to the land by right of the Treaty—and I agree with him. This is a most suitable challenge from which to consider the bill’s purpose which is to manage immigration through balancing the rights of the individual and the national interest as determined by the Crown. It is an interesting twist of truth that the national interest is determined by the Crown. Because of course Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the first immigration document of this nation puts forward another vision—that the national interest is determined in dialogue and cooperation between the Treaty partners. 
Despite the words of Justice Durie in the Immigration Service’s promotional material and the status attributed on its website to the Treaty as the founding document of our nation there appears to have been no specific Maori input into the Immigration Act review that led to this bill. Such apparent neglect clearly means that no amount of public relation airbrushing can hide the fact that the Government does not see that a Treaty obligation exists in relation to immigration. The Maori Party contends that until the Government does see it exists no immigration policy can have any legitimacy. We believe that as the Treaty partner Maori should be consulted on every aspect concerning migrants who wish to reside here. 
The aims of the bill are broad-sweeping clarifying details around the very nature of residence and citizenship policies. We are told that the proposals will enhance the security of New Zealand facilitate the settlement of migrants refugees and protected persons and support New Zealand’s immigration-related international obligations. In short the tangata Tiriti—those who come to this land by virtue of the Treaty—will be well protected and for some individual tangata whenua those who perhaps work in the immigration system or those who may have relationships that will be supported through the improvements made to residence decisions there may be some benefit that results from the changes. But for Maori as a partner to the Treaty of Waitangi there is absolutely nothing. 
There is nothing in this bill that reflects a partnership approach in which tangata whenua in a spirit of manaakitanga and demonstration of rangatiratanga can develop systems for whanau hapu and iwi to help immigrants and refugees in their adjustment to Aotearoa. There is nothing in this bill that serves to provide incentives for whanau hapu and iwi to produce economic social cultural and environmental benefits out of pooling their skills knowledge talents and experience with those of new New Zealanders. There is nothing in this bill to support whanau hapu and iwi and new migrants to develop collective strategies for moving forward together as communities and ultimately as a nation. 
It is not as if the concept of a Treaty partnership is automatically alien or unwelcome to new migrants. Two weeks ago I received an email from one of these new New Zealanders living in Dunedin who told me: “I do very much agree that newcomers to New Zealand need to be introduced in a friendly way to the Treaty and Maori culture. Also the idea of a welcome from tangata whenua is a nice concept indeed and I wish this were in place when my family moved here first in 2003. Maori inclusion in immigration planning is important.” 
So one has to ask this question. If this man having lived in Aotearoa for 4 years can see value in our having Maori inclusion in immigration planning then what is stopping other tangata Tiriti many of whom are descended from new settlers who have been living here for some 167 years from also being able to support Maori having a partnership role? 
What then does this bill do? Far from being the friendly welcome this bill seems just another opportunity to enforce the snooping power and control regime that has dominated justice legislation. The extensions of State power will now include greater powers of search entry and detention. Immigration officials will be able to detain people without warrant for up to 4 hours and without a warrant of commitment for up to 96 hours. Juxtaposed against the new powers for immigration officers to enter inspect and search premises for suspected persons of interest we are pleased that it appears the accused will not automatically be confined to jail upon suspicion. 
The performance of the New Zealand Government alerts us to what the purpose of this bill is really about—that is to build a case for upping the ante in the fight against terrorism. A significant context of the bill given its provisions is the assumed security threat raised in other very recent bills and reports such as the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill the Aviation Security Legislation Bill and the Law Commission’s  
Search and Surveillance Powers  
report. 
This Immigration Bill creates a whole new artillery of secret information and special advocates. The bill also allows classified information to be used with special safeguards. It sets up the case by which the bill will enable the future collection and use of biometric information such as fingerprints iris scans and photographs for identity verification purposes. The bill also proposes to disband the four independent appellate bodies that currently exist and collapse them into one. 
Finally I want to talk about this whole fascination with information—classified or otherwise. In a previous life as an Associate Minister of Maori Affairs I was approached by a former Minister of Immigration Lianne Dalziel who I believed had a genuine interest in understanding and valuing the context that te Tiriti o Waitangi establishes for immigration. We called together a consultation hui in February 2001 at which from memory the participants included Professor Ranginui Walker Pauline Tangiora Atareta Poananga Amster Reedy Sir Paul Reeves Eru Potaka-Dewes Annette Sykes the Hon Tuariki Delamere Moana Jackson Jason Fox and many other expert advisers across Te Ao Maori. As I recall a very useful report was written—a report that never saw the light of day. For the life of me I cannot work out what was so confidential or why the information in their report warranted such a classified security rating that the nation should be spared from its ideas and recommendations. 
The Immigration Bill sets in place a new set of minimum standards and protocols relating to international protection deportation appeals compliance and enforcement and detention and monitoring. But there is one standard above all standards that this bill fails to honour and that standard is set by te Tiriti o Waitangi. The Maori Party will not support this bill.