Dalziel Lianne: Budget Debate 
Dalziel Lianne: Budget Debate 
[Volume:608;Page:5879] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 I congratulate the Minister of Finance on introducing a responsible Budget. It is responsible because it acknowledges that there are external matters the impact of which we cannot fully predict: international terrorism conflict disease and economic stagnation in many of the world’s most important economies. There are local factors like drought the impact that the severe acute respiratory syndrome has had on tourism and the prospect of a dry winter. All of these call for a responsible approach so that we can withstand the impacts of these external and internal factors. 
This Budget is a responsible Budget because it invests in the growth and innovation framework. It is a responsible Budget because it prioritises health and education in terms of investing in the social fabric of society—the health and well-being of all New Zealanders. 
I want to focus my comments in this Budget debate for 2003 on the immigration aspects of the Budget. This Budget shows this Government’s commitment to migrants by ensuring that the benefits are shared by all. Just 3½ years ago I inherited an immigration portfolio that was focused solely on the numbers of people coming into the country. This Government said from the outset that it does not matter how many people come to New Zealand under immigration policy; it is what happens to them after they arrive in New Zealand that matters. Successful settlement outcomes benefit the migrants and benefit New Zealand. Everything we have done over the past 3½ years has been about improving the prospects for new migrants as well as minimising the failures which impose a considerable cost on New Zealand as a whole. There are people who like to pretend that there is no cost imposed on the New Zealand taxpayer when there are failures but I can assure this House that there is an incredible cost and one that I am determined to reduce. 
When I became Minister I coined a phrase. I said there were people in this country who had residence who could not get work and there were people in this country who had work who could not get residence. This Government’s approach to developing settlement programmes has been about addressing the former of these—people in this country who have already got residence and cannot get a job. I am amazed that the National Party finds that situation acceptable but I guess it was its policy that brought it about. The work-to-residence policy including the talent visa has been about addressing the latter—people who can get work in New Zealand well-paid work but cannot get residence. Our approach is about addressing that issue. 
The settlement programmes are growing. They have been incredibly successful. For example the Auckland chamber of commerce successfully matched over 300 skilled migrants with skilled work in its first year of operating the “New Kiwis” website. What a fantastic partnership between the public sector and the private sector working together to make a difference for skilled migrants! The talent visa accredited employers programme has seen 125 employers accredited in the past year and 250 talent visas issued since it was established. That is a tremendous record of achievement in just 1 year of operation when there was nothing like it in place before we took office. 
There is no question that this Government has made a real difference to immigration policy but we are not ones to rest on our laurels. For over a year now I have signalled the need for New Zealand to shift from being a passive recipient of immigration applications to being an active recruiter of the skills and the talent we need. In fact the National Government set up a very good programme before it left office in 1999 and that was a research programme—the longitudinal study of migrants in New Zealand—to establish what made for successful settlement of migrants to New Zealand. We are using the information that that survey is giving us to know what we should be looking for in terms of successful settlement outcomes and we are also looking at how we can improve the outcomes for those who take residence here. 
The skilled business stream of the New Zealand Immigration Programme is where we need new migrants to hit the ground running when they arrive in New Zealand. It is no good that they sit back and cannot participate in either society or the economy. That is not what the skilled business stream of migration is for. If migrants can hit the ground running then it is good for New Zealand it is good for the migrant and it is an absolute win-win. This year’s Budget contains within it funding for the infrastructure to enable this to occur. This funding will allow the Immigration Service more actively to match skilled migrants with actual real opportunities real jobs here in New Zealand and that will mean they will be able to contribute to and participate in New Zealand’s society and the economy sooner. 
It will also enable us to recruit in parts of the world where we have not had a real presence in the past and we will be able actively to recruit those already living working or studying in New Zealand. Close to 40 percent of all applications for residence are lodged on shore. Clearly those who have already been here—living here working here studying here—for 2 or 3 years have already begun well and truly to establish themselves to be well settled in this country. The outcomes for those who are already living and working here are exponentially greater than for those who have never even visited New Zealand in their entire life. 
The reason that settlement outcomes are poorer for those who have never been here is really about expectations. Unmet expectations are the key driver of poor settlement outcomes. People need realistic expectations before they move halfway around the world. I want to quote from a letter written to the Prime Minister a few weeks ago. It is from an Indian professional engineer who had come to New Zealand on a job search visa. His visa expires in September but after his multiple job rejections he has already booked his ticket home. He can be here until September but he has booked his ticket home. He speaks of meeting other Indians and says that 95 percent of those whom he has met are working in menial jobs well below their level of qualification. In fact he describes in the letter people actually saying they have had to underplay their qualifications and their skills in order to get forecourt attendant jobs at the local service station. He says: “In my case I am almost ruined. I left my class 1 engineer post in India and I have already spent about half a million rupees. Even I had to ask my son in the UK to send some money meant for his studies.” What he says is that he as a new migrant is prepared to take a step down the ladder but he is not prepared to go to the bottom of the ladder and start all over again. 
What this Budget signals for immigration is that we no longer want to invite people to come to New Zealand under the general skills category when we know they are destined to fail. We want to provide potential migrants with a realistic assessment of their prospects in New Zealand. We want to match skilled migrants with skilled job opportunities. We want migrants to know what they need in order to gain skilled employment and if that means meeting professional registration requirements undertaking further study or improving their English ability prior to gaining residence then that is the right approach. We know from the bitter experience of the doctors the information technology specialists and the scientists driving taxis whom we have all met that it is not good enough to tell people that they are qualified for skilled migration but not qualified for skilled work in New Zealand. 
In the role of Minister of Immigration I do have to accept that there are those who seek to abuse the system and this Budget addresses that issue as well. We are putting in $19.82 million to strengthen the present immigration capability for intelligence providing more resources for the investigation and prosecution of immigration fraud.