Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak on the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill. Just echoing the sentiment from the previous speaker Camilla Belich it is good to see the House in its entirety condemn migrant exploitation because we know that migrant exploitation has been rife and that successive Governments have failed to take substantive action to tackle it. Whether it has been Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) workers living in overcrowded conditions; people on employer-bound visas being effectively paid less than the minimum wage because of frankly practices of modern-day slavery; bullying and harassment that goes unreported because again of employer-bound visas and because of the lack of confidence that our community has that once they report exploitation it will actually get followed through on—I know that one of the speakers previously talked about those really low rates of reports of exploitation being followed through with an investigation and that does create the conditions where our migrant communities do not feel like they can have faith in the systems that are supposed to be there to protect them.So when we know that we've got a raft of issues the response requires action both on the prevention side of things as well as addressing exploitation once it has happened. I acknowledge that this Government has brought in changes such as the migrant exploitation protection work visa which supports migrants once they have been exploited. With this bill there are predominantly measures to address exploitation once it has happened in the forms of infringement offences and the publication of names of employers that are convicted of immigration offences or issued with infringement notices. And yes that may help future workers to know which employers have bad practices but it doesn't necessarily protect those workers that have experienced exploitation in the first place.Having just come as a Parliament from the inquiry on migrant exploitation where we had a cross-party group examine the issue of exploitation a little bit in-depth I do find it somewhat disappointing that we could have had an opportunity here to address some of the policy settings that enable exploitation to happen in the first place. The fact that employer-bound visas remain in place here despite unions despite the Productivity Commission despite migrants themselves raising them as something that is deeply problematic is really concerning.I also note that in the research that was used to get this bill together it was identified that groups such as international students essential skills visa holders and working holidaymakers are some of the most vulnerable to exploitation. When are we going to have the conversation as a country about the fact that despite the doubling of the working holiday visa numbers we continue having countries that can only work for the same employer for three months creating the conditions for that transient nature of employment and the ability for people to basically be shifted around jobs that are not paying enough and for those people to not feel confident again with raising exploitation.So while this bill does have some really good components and I do think particularly the publication of exploitative employers will result in better awareness by the community there are also some concerns that we have around the increased search powers for immigration officers. Without evidence that the restrictions imposed on their current powers unduly affect their ability to perform their role in this instance the concern that we have is that the powers being granted for immigration officers to request documents from employers in relationship to their obligation rather than from employees themselves—but this is basically what is provided for in the Immigration Act but only where the officer enters the premises first—could result in some really perverse outcomes for say overstayers.So while there may be increased powers and that may result in cracking down on exploitative employers the reality is that overstayers could be facing increased rates and without the support mechanisms to actually support overstayers who have been exploited what we're going to be seeing are some of the situations that I myself as an MP have been working on with constituents which are overstayers who face exploitation their workplace gets raided and those overstayers just get told Well see ya later." or you may be invited to participate in the judicial process to hold those employers to account and once you finish you're just treated as expendable evidence.I think this bill could have addressed some of those safeguards to ensure that overstayers for example feel like they will be supported as we increase those punitive measures towards employers. There is nothing here around that and that is something that the Greens will be looking closely at in terms of the feedback that we receive at the select committee stage because otherwise what we'll be creating is once again an environment of fear where overstayers will feel like these measures are not there to protect them. They may be there to hold exploitative employers to account but the wellbeing over those overstayers isn't taken into account or factored in. Actually all that that creates is further pushing the exploitation underground.I did want to comment on some of the contributions from one of the National Party members and I wanted to sort of address those because we don't have that many people in this House who come from migrant backgrounds let alone who have experienced being on a temporary visa. I was quite disappointed actually to see the member talk about I guess normalising exploitation and talking about exploitation as though it is just the migrant experience in say sectors like hospitality. I think we've got to be really careful about normalising exploitation in our migrant communities like it's just a thing that we experience as a sort of rite of passage in migrant families because it is not the case. We should not tolerate exploitation. But equally to my friends on the other side of the Government side I also want them to take some responsibility on how policy settings and visa settings can create supportive environments or can create environments where exploitation is allowed to happen.So this bill could have been more holistic. It is not just about holding employers to account; it is also about reflecting that if we're all committed on ending exploitation we would have decoupled work visas from single employers we would have explored an amnesty for overstayers we would have done far more than what is here. And it is an omnibus bill right. It was recognised in the bill that we needed to take just more than a single amendment and one piece of legislation and rather to look at a raft of issues. So I do see this as a missed opportunity.Equally it was raised in the research that informed this bill that migrants do know little about their rights. And I would say as somebody who was—DEPUTY SPEAKER: So Mr Menéndez-March you've talked about what's not in the bill; let's have three minutes of talking about what's in the bill shall we?RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: Yeah. I'm talking about the research that informed this bill and that it is in this paper—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Good. Well I'll be looking for that.RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: Yeah. I assume the Speaker has read the paper as well. So I'm talking about this. [Holds up the paper.] So in this paper in the cover sheet it talked about the research that helped us build this bill—it was identified actually by the first speaker the Minister Priyanca Radhakrishnan—that part of what informed this bill was that migrants did not know enough about their working rights. Again one of the things that I do see missing here while the Minister talked about—and I'm addressing the previous contributions by the Minister—some other initiatives that are in place—but what we can do to strengthen this bill in the select committee stage and I do hope that I hear from submitters on this issue is ask whether those same questions are true that migrants are better aware of their rights.So once again just to talk about the I guess more punitive side of the bill punitive measures do not prevent crime from happening. Punitive measures have very little evidence of actually discouraging exploitation from happening in the first place and we know this. When we put tougher penalties on certain crimes it doesn't necessarily guarantee that crime will go down. We do know that by addressing the factors that lead to people committing those crimes in the first place that is how we can reduce crimes once and for all. So just simply putting in those punitive measures won't be enough.I just want to say that you know in the same way that some members are able to reflect on their experience growing up in the restaurants of their families I do want to reflect on the lived experience of those of us who have been on temporary visas. The reality is that it takes more than just punishing employers; it takes a raft of support measures and throughout the passage of this bill in the select committee stage we'll be ensuring that those measures are strengthened. Kia ora."