Faafoi KrisIMMIGRATION (COVID-19 RESPONSE) AMENDMENT BILLThird ReadingHon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Immigration): I present a legislative statement on the Immigration (COVID-19 Response) Amendment Bill. SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the parliamentary website. Before I call the Minister I'm going to indicate that I'm going to be in the Chair for a period this afternoon and we are going to test the purposes of these legislative statements and I'm going to be very tight on members not reading their speeches. Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I move That the Immigration (COVID-19 Response) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. This bill is being passed on 6 May because the legislation that it replaces or updates will extinguish on 15 May. There were two contentious issues that came out of the second reading the committee stage and the select committee stage of this piece of legislation that were raised by the Opposition and I want to again address those to make it clear as to why it is necessary to extend this bill by two years and also make the other changes to the bill that ensure that we have the flexibility that we need. To clarify for—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! Order! Can members—as they're leaving the Chamber it's very very rude to stop and talk and have your back to the person who's speaking. There's an ability for whips to go and talk to other people or leaders but not for other members to wander around having a chat. Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The original piece of legislation passed roughly 12 or 13 months ago was in order to respond flexibly and swiftly and quickly to the global pandemic. That allowed Immigration New Zealand to deal with visa changes as classes and not as individuals and I think there was a fundamental misunderstanding of that from the Opposition both through the select committee and through the second reading and committee of the whole House given the contributions that they gave in those debates and in the select committee process. Again I will reiterate: this piece of legislation was brought in in order to deal with the border closures at this time last year and to give the flexibility to the Government to make those changes. We do not know how long this pandemic will last for. When we introduced this bill about six weeks ago there was talk in this House that things seemed to be improving around the world. In that short amount of time we have seen just how seriously and how quickly the global pandemic can spread. So in order for us to have the flexibility and in response to our immigration settings this Government has sought a two-year extension to the powers that are currently in place. The Opposition argued that that should only be 12 months. If that were the case given the issues and the length of time that we imagined that our borders would be closed and that we think that the global pandemic will continue to have its way around the world in order to extend beyond that 12 months we'd probably be in this House in September or October looking to extend these powers again. While arguments have been made across the other side of the House that it should be 12 months we would argue that two years or 24 months is the right judgment to make in terms of the length of the extension of this legislation. The other issue that was raised by the Opposition through a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) was to introduce the 28-day rule to the regulations or the special directions that I as the Minister of Immigration may make or that the Government may make in order to change the classes of visas or the decisions that the Government may make. We believe given the last 12 months that that is not practical. One example of that not being practical in real terms is a decision that we have made this week for about 5500 Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) scheme workers who are already in the country. We have waived the right for certain conditions of renewing their RSE visas in order for that process to be more efficient and effective for them. We are able to do that as a class swiftly. If we had to do that with a 28-day rule that would delay the process for them and the suggestion that has come from the Opposition that we no longer need these powers—the fundamental powers within the legislation—would see 5500 applications from those RSE workers make their way to Immigration New Zealand to process. That's just not pragmatic in the current situation. It would cause issues for those individual RSE visa applicants and I would hazard a guess the fortnightly meeting that I have with the horticulture and viticulture sector would be that they are experiencing extreme delays in those visa chain processes and that that time frame would not be ideal for them. So Mr Speaker in order for you to see the benefits of the legislative statement I believe I have dealt with some of the arguments that are going to come from the Opposition that they have made obviously at the first reading the second reading the select committee and the committee of the whole House. I believe that despite not supporting the SOPs we have a piece of legislation here that will enable us to continue to control the flows at the border in the way that the public has entrusted in the Government over the last 13 years to keep us safe and I commend this bill to the House. SPEAKER: Before I call the next member it sounded at the beginning of the Minister's speech like he might have moved the first reading of the bill. I just wanted to check that he'd moved the third reading before I put the question. Hon Kris Faafoi: I believe I said third". SPEAKER: Well we'll—the question is that the motion be agreed to."