Young Jonathan: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee[Sitting date: 31 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2722. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): This Government does take very seriously the issue of immigrant exploitation in the workforce. We have seen different media releases about those sorts of occurrences. There are a number of reasons of course—not just the human rights reasons—why this is such an important component of this bill. We have companies in New Zealand that work hard at what they do to employ people and pay good wages and put into place in the workforce very strong health and safety measures. As soon as an employer starts to exploit an immigrant worker they undercut and undermine all of those companies that through their goodwill and compliance with New Zealand law seek to put in place employment conditions that keep a workforce safe and pay a good wage to help New Zealand families.It is not just about the human rightsof people which are incredibly important but it is also about maintaining a workplace environment in this country that we can be proud of. The particular measure in this bill that deals with the exploitation of migrant workers is very very important because it shores up that sort of behaviour and brings it to accountability. Sue Moroney in her speech made a comment that we do not have enough people in the labour inspectorate to actually enforce these measures and to ensure this does not happen. Looking back at the number of people in the labour inspectorate what we see is that since 2008 until today there has been a 37 percent increase in the number of inspectors. I would certainly say it is important to have those people and surely her statement now becomes an indictment on the previous Government because we have increased that number by 37 percent. We do need labour inspectors to be empowered in those places in order to address these issues and aspects of this bill address that.As I just mentioned before one of the reports that has come to light has been a case in Auckland. Let me just briefly touch on this for the sake of those listening here and outside this Parliament. There was a case in Auckland where a number of immigrant employees were taken advantage of and the Employment Relations Authority became aware of this addressed this issue and brought fines against the employer. The exploitation claims were that the employees had to pay a premium or capital infusion of up to $15000 to secure employment. I mean what a travesty of the New Zealand way of life that that sort of extortion would take place. They were not paid any wages at all and they were pressured to loan further sums to the company. An office in central Auckland in a commercial building was turned into accommodation for those who ran out of money for rent but it had no access to a shower or to a kitchen. The people survived mainly on fruit and instant noodles. This is the sort of behaviour that this bill determines to stamp out.Sue Moroney: But it won’t.JONATHAN YOUNG: It will stamp this out and we will be putting tools and measures in place. The bill makes employers who are residence class visa holders liable for deportation. They have come to New Zealand for the better way of life that they have sought and instead they have brought with them misery. They do not deserve to live in this country to experience what they hoped they might achieve. They are liable for deportation if they are convicted of exploiting migrant workers.This Government does take this sort of behaviour seriously. Not only is it dreadful treatment and a denial of human rights—a denial of the right of a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work which we know the workforce in this country desires—[Bell rung]—and relies upon in order for us—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Does the member wish to continue?JONATHAN YOUNG: Yes—sorry Mr Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Mr Young.JONATHAN YOUNG: This bill includes two amendments that will protect migrants from exploitation. The amendment in Part 1 will see employers who hold residence class visas liable for deportation if they are convicted of that degree of exploitation of migrant workers—just desserts we say—or if they knowingly employ migrant workers without the right to work. I guess this is also protecting the New Zealand workforce because they need to be people who have the right to work. We know that this is an area of real tension.I remember a case back in New Plymouth where some migrant workers came in employed by a reputable company. The local workforce was pretty upset that these men came in to work in New Plymouth. They were aluminium welders. People felt: “Well I can do that job.” These men came from the Philippines with their families. They previously had been welders of aluminium air frames so they were highly specialised. The work that this company was doing was welding bumper bars and accessories to utes and vehicles and exporting these across to Australia and different places in the South Pacific and in Asia.When it came to the test of whether there were New Zealanders able to do this work in this case they were able to do it for about 1 or 2 hours but not for the whole work day. So the experience of these welders was something that was a skill not currently resident in the workforce. After the tension around that issue and the debate around it from what I understand the union appreciated the fact that the experience of these welders—particularly in aluminium—enabled the workforce at large to be involved in a project that brought export dollars into that company and into the country.Immigrant employment is important to New Zealand but we must ensure that it is not exploited and that we have labour laws and immigration law that protects workers’ human rights and protects them in the workforce. This bill has many provisions that address that. I am very pleased to commend this bill to the Committee.