Wong Pansy: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Wong Pansy: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6807] 
PANSY WONG (NZ National) 
: The Minister of Immigration got only one thing right. This legislation cannot be a knee-jerk reaction; there have been 4 years of incompetent management by that Minister of the immigration portfolio. That is why it has ended up with a backlog that will take 2½ years to process. That is why we have ended up having to rush legislation through Parliament to lapse people who have had their applications in the pool for 2 years and who are now being told: “Tough luck!”. They will just get their fees refunded; they will not even be compensated for interest lost during that time. That does nothing for the international reputation of New Zealand. 
But today has been an eye-opener. It confirms the arrogant approach of the Labour Government. When it makes mistakes it never apologises. I just make that observation. When the Labour Government makes mistakes it adopts the following actions: it never apologises it blames everyone in sight and it rushes legislation through under urgency. It is quite frightening. Even today I personally have felt the anger of the Minister. If anyone dares to question her actions she says something like: “Well Pansy Wong you just wait and see.” I think wow it must be quite frightening for all those immigration consultants and business organisations. Who would dare to write any letters to that Minister of Immigration that point out her faults or mistakes? I presume she treats everybody equally so she would tell them: “You just wait and see.” She reads out letters of endorsement only. I think the scenario is quite clear: one should never question the Labour Government or cross it; otherwise one shall pay the price. A very very threatening environment is created and it is reinforced by the provisions in this legislation. 
Today the legislation is being challenged by the Opposition parties only. I doubt very much whether United Future members have actually read the bill or whether Labour back-bench members understand what it is all about. The environment that has been created and that now extends to the Immigration Service gives absolute power to the chief executive the Minister and the visa officers to make rulings. This legislation states that if they get those rulings wrong they will be treated as correct. I think that in future members on this side of the House will have a real problem because most of us will have a lot of constituents who want to question immigration rulings. We will have to tell them “Tough luck!” because the legislation was rushed through Parliament and in effect a ruling on the so-called “order and manner of processing” cannot be questioned. Lots of people will have no recourse from that. What has happened to the open and transparent governance that this Labour Government has always claimed to have? 
The other eye-opener for me anyway is to know—Labour and United Future would not admit it but it is true—that the Government has started to study New Zealand First’s immigration policy. Its members have continued to ask New Zealand First members why they do not vote for the legislation as it is that party’s immigration policy. I find the double standard very confusing. New Zealand First wants to restrict immigration and this is anti-migrant. Labour and United Future are rushing through this legislation to legislate away the rights of 20000 people for proper assessment and to bring down the number of migrants and they claim that is pro-migrant. What is the difference? Nobody seems to want to take a call and explain. Why do Labour and United Future not stand up and say they have adopted New Zealand First’s immigration policy and will continue to study its immigration policy? The public in future should be very aware of that. 
Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. 
PANSY WONG 
: The passage of this bill further cements a Labour governance style of being heavy-handed; Labour can do no wrong and the critics had better watch out. Minister Lianne Dalziel demonstrated that by accusing me of somehow being involved with money-laundering immigration scams. The only crime I am guilty of is to question her legislation. It is a day of shame in Parliament when a Minister fails to acknowledge that she is not on top of her portfolio and resorts to threats to her fellow MPs. 
Did she not promise to bring in legislation to regulate immigration consultants who are not behaving according to the way that the law was drafted? Did she not promise to do that? She has failed to do it and as a result some potential migrants have had a raw deal. She did not bring legislation to the House to deal to those immigration consultants. Instead she is rushing legislation through under urgency to deal to over 20000 innocent migrant applicants who responded to her promotion in various places in October 2001 I think it was to encourage people to apply to come to New Zealand. The points required at that stage were 24 or 25; now she is saying that all those applications should lapse. 
Global prioritisation—another Labour spin—really means that Chinese Indians and Koreans need not apply. Labour is in a glass house and should not throw stones at New Zealand First because Labour really agrees with that party’s immigration policy. This global prioritisation means less transparent and objective criteria will apply. It is a recipe for corruption. Immigration consultants and organisations that have the ear of the politicians and officials can in future expect favourable treatment. Under the provisions of this bill the public and Opposition MPs cannot question appeal or seek review. United Future’s part in opening the door to corruption in our country’s immigration system will not be forgotten. “United” they might be but there will not be much of a “Future”. 
The Minister says the New Zealand Immigration Service has the capacity to implement this global prioritisation. Why should we have confidence in that when it is clear that in the House today under urgency provisions are being introduced to clear a backlog of applications that would take the service 2½ years to assess? Under the Labour Government’s so-called new skilled migrants policy there is provision for the service simply to lapse applications when it thinks fit or to decide without having to explain why or not to issue a letter of invitation. That provision was introduced just to avoid the Government having to put more resources into making sure the Immigration Service is doing its job properly. This Minister who has spent 4 years in her portfolio adopts a defensive mentality. She oversees a backlog of applications made in the past 2 years then passes legislation under urgency to lapse those innocent people who responded in good faith to the invitation to apply to come to New Zealand.