O'Rourke Denis: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is subject to correctionO'Rourke Denis: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 17 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14008. Text is subject to correction.]8.DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First)to theMinister of Immigration: How many people are currently classified as unlawfully in New Zealand and what steps if any has he taken to reduce that number?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration):The most recent figure we have is from 2012 and estimates that 14044—Rt Hon Winston Peters: How many?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: —14044—unlawful overstayers were in New Zealand. This is the lowest number this century and is more than 20 percent less than in 2007 under the Labour - New Zealand First Government when—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption ]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can anticipate the point of order but I will hear it from the member.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Great minds think alike. There was no New Zealand First - Labour coalition Government.Mr SPEAKER: It would be helpful to the order of this House if the Minister would not refer to it as a “Labour - New Zealand First Government”.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: There were still 3000 more overstayers in 2007. To the second part of the question the Government has incentivised voluntary departures by banning anyone deported from New Zealand from coming back until they have repaid the taxpayer for the cost of their deportation. Even then it is unlikely thatthey would be let back in. Those and other changes have contributed to many more overstayers choosing to leave voluntarily rather than being forcefully deported.Denis O’Rourke: If the Government’s policy regarding people unlawfully in New Zealand was actually effective why are the numbers—still at well over 14000—still so high?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I would simply dispute the preface to the question. The numbers are low and dropping.Denis O’Rourke: Does the Minister accept that the current high level of people unlawfully in New Zealand and the low probability of deportation constitute a strong signal to others that they can break immigration law with impunity; if not why not?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Well I simply do not accept that it is high. It is the lowest figure this century and continues to drop. It is 23 percent lower than when that party supported the previous Government.Denis O’Rourke: What is the estimated cost in terms of health criminal justice law enforcement education and other costs associated with people unlawfully in New Zealand?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I do not have that figure to hand. I would be very happy to estimate it if the member puts it down in a written question. But I have every confidence that it would be at least 23 percent lower than in 2007.Denis O’Rourke: What steps have been taken to recoup the costs of deporting people unlawfully in New Zealand and have those steps been successful?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I think it is firstly important to point out that the removal and deportation costs have halved since 2005-06 and the Government has a very strict policy that nobody may apply for re-entry into New Zealand until the taxpayer is refunded the costs of their deportation. That is why although deportations have increased slightly the voluntary departures have more than doubled.