Fenton Darien: Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Fenton Darien: Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:10108] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 That is indeed what I intend to do Mr Chair. I do intend to speak about clauses 1 to 4 of the Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Bill. I will start with clause 1 “Title” which reads: “This Act is the Immigration Act 2009 Amendment Act 2010.” 
Indeed we could call this bill if we wanted to the “Immigration (Unfortunate Mistake) Amendment Bill 2010” or we could call it if we wanted to the “Immigration Act the Minister Intends to Find Other Solutions for”—which of course we welcome—“Amendment Bill 2010”. I could go on about that but members on the Opposition side of the Chamber are generous and as we have noted the Minister has said the omission of a reference to section 474 of the Immigration Act on Supplementary Order Paper 32 should not have happened and he will be looking to find solutions. I do not want to blame the drafters of the Immigration Bill but I will say as I said earlier that it was a huge bill. It was a bill that took many many years to work on. Those of us who are now on this side of the Chamber worked on it; we began the work on that bill. We worked on it in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and in fact— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: We wrote it. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: —as my colleague says we wrote it—we took it through all of its process in the select committee and then it came back for its second reading under this Government. So I do not want to spend too much time on trying to debate whether there should be a different title. 
I would like to talk about clause 3 if I may which states: “This Act amends the Immigration Act 2009.” I think that one of the things that the Act does is to set up the whole kind of platform for future immigration. Unfortunately there have been some pretty awful announcements since it was enacted and I am sure that I am allowed to refer to those because this bill is about the commencement date of that Act and what happens in bringing it into force. I mentioned in my first reading speech the cheque-book immigration policy announced by Minister Coleman. I do not want to be too unpleasant about that Minister’s life; I know that he has things to celebrate. But I have to say we are very concerned that the prize of New Zealand citizenship is being sold to the highest bidders never mind what skills and values those people may or may not possess. I do wonder about this whole thing of bringing retirees into the family category—the parent category—and whether we are talking about the Government’s latest make-work programme. You know we are going to bring in these older people— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: No commencement. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Commencement? OK—no principal Act. Are we bringing people in for a make-work programme? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: No! 
DARIEN FENTON 
: All right Mr Chairperson; I will move on to the next clause which deals with the commencement of the legislation. 
Clause 4 is about the commencement date of the principal Act and some announcements have been made since that Act was enacted. A change to the registered seasonal employers’ scheme removes the minimum wage for workers there. That change has been made since the 2009 Act was enacted and it will be affected by the commencement date of this bill. We on this side of the Chamber are very concerned about that. So in relation to the commencement provisions in clause 4 we are saying perhaps we should backtrack a little and go back to the situation that existed when the Act was brought into being in 2009. The Minister should retract the announcements that he has made because quite frankly they are appalling. They are affecting New Zealanders; they are affecting New Zealand workers and other New Zealanders. As I said it is cheque-book immigration. It is about providing visas for cash and we do not support that. Thank you.