Harawira Hone: Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill — Third Reading 
Harawira Hone: Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:638;Page:8782] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou te Whare. It is a rare occurrence when one can look through a Government website and find policy that reflects and honours our nation’s constitutional document the Treaty of Waitangi. It is hard to believe but in preparing for the third reading debate on the Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill I happened upon the Immigration New Zealand website where I found the following information: “The Treaty is recognised as the first immigration agreement between Maori and Pakeha (European settlers). … The Treaty was important firstly to control the thousands of future emigrants to Aotearoa New Zealand and secondly to protect the rights of Maori people. The benefits to both parties were clear—settlement rights for Pakeha and the natural right of the tangata whenua (the people of the land) would be respected and affirmed. … Immigration New Zealand recognises that the Treaty of Waitangi is the `founding document of our nation’. This means that Immigration New Zealand will consult with Maori on immigration matters.”—not the Maori inside Government but real Maori.  
I doubt that members of the Maori Party could have said it better themselves. I recap. The Treaty is recognised as the first immigration agreement. The Treaty is the founding document of our nation. The Treaty is important to control the thousands of future immigrants to Aotearoa and to protect the rights of Maori and Immigration New Zealand will consult with Maori on immigration matters. I put it to the House that if we are truly to enhance this country’s reputation as a migrant destination then it is the Treaty of Waitangi that will help to get us there.  
During the first reading debate on this bill in December 2005 Dr Sharples called the Treaty the first charter for migrants emigrating to Aotearoa. He described the Treaty as a way to unite people a concept that Maori fully endorsed in 1840 but which has since been overlooked neglected downgraded and marginalised by successive Governments including this current Labour Government. I need to point out here without any malice whatsoever that even Labour’s own Maori MPs Parekura Horomia Nanaia Mahuta Mita Ririnui Mahara Okeroa Dover Samuels Shane Jones Jill Pettis and Moana Mackey have supported the deletion of the Treaty principles from legislation the removal of the Treaty from the school curriculum the cancellation of manaaki tauira and the instructions to the district health boards to tread softly as far as the Treaty clauses go.  
During the second reading debate last year my colleague Te Ururoa Flavell quoted Dr Ranginui Walker who described the preamble to the Treaty as the original charter for immigration—a charter that allowed immigration to Aotearoa from Australia and the UK but requires consultation with Maori as Treaty partner for any variation. Dr Walker said the Government had ignored the notion of partnership by unilaterally deciding who can enter Aotearoa without consultation with Maori. On the Immigration New Zealand website there is specific guidance to help all visitors to our shores and I quote: “to realise the significance of the Treaty within every aspect of life in Aotearoa New Zealand.” Such fine words.  
The Maori Party endorsed those statements from Immigration New Zealand and introduced Supplementary Order Papers to give weight to those statements. We proposed a way for Maori to be involved in formulating policy in order in fact to fulfil the agency’s own intentions to “consult with Maori on immigration matters.” We even proposed a cultural education programme which included Te Tiriti o Waitangi tikanga and te reo Maori for immigration advisers. This bill is supposed to determine what constitutes immigration advice the licensing process and who can and cannot be licensed. It was our considered view that the cultural education programme we were proposing would have helped immigration advisers ensure that migrants and visitors could indeed realise the significance of the Treaty within every aspect of life here in Aotearoa New Zealand.  
At another level it occurs to me that if we are to honour the spirit of partnership in the Treaty then the Government must also recognise the need to involve Maori in immigration policy and practice—and not just through meaningless words on a website. For a relationship to work both parties must be heard yet since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi Maori have had no input into developing immigration policy.  
We also suggested setting up a Maori immigration education council to help guide the Crown in immigration matters as a way of acknowledging Maori as partners in the Treaty—our nation’s original immigration document. The council would enable Maorito work with the Crown in setting immigration policy and advice and strategic directions through membership on the Immigration Advisers Authority and the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal as proposed under this bill. The council would also examine all issues related to the impact of immigration on Maori and report back on these to iwi the Minister of Maori Affairs the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Immigration.  
Those are all good ideas one would think but—hello; what was the Government’s response? Rational debate? Thoughtful consideration? Reasoned argument? Hell no! The Government pulled the old Standing Order 319 trick putting a financial veto on our proposals. It said: “No money honey! No debate no argument no consideration. Just no way Maori boy! We may have an $11 billion surplus and you might have a good idea but we ain’t going to spend any of our money on it.” I hear the Hon David Cunliffe talking about a Maori immigration council and that would be a good idea. It is something the Maori Party proposed quite early on even though the Government chose not to support the Supplementary Order Paper. If the intention is to go through with that we would be supportive of that notion.  
The key part to the changes introduced through this bill is setting quality standards for all immigration advisers which raises the question of course about what exactly defines quality and how one measures it because of course the Maori Party’s proposals were designed specifically to increase the quality of immigration advisers’ knowledge and understanding of the Treaty tikanga Maori and te reo Maori—qualities that should be paramount in those who would guide and advise migrants refugees and visitors to our fair shores.  
We were not surprised that submitters also held very strong views about quality standards. The National Council of Women said that competency standards were crucial to improving the quality of advice and that a robust external consultation process was important to help develop such standards. We also agreed with the submission from TuarikiDelamere calling for a system to determine lawyers’ competency to act as immigration advisers. In fact this whole area of guidance on standards and cultural competency was something we felt that a Treaty commissioner could provide guidance on helping to define and measure the capability of immigration advisers to carry out their duties consistent with the guidelines on their website.  
We agree with the need for quality standards but we call for that quality to be determined by Treaty principles in partnership and not just by affordability. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to raise the debate around the Treaty of Waitangi and immigration in the 21st century. The Treaty of Waitangi is indeed the founding document of our nation and for the Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill to have any meaning it must recognise in every aspect the significance of the Treaty and all facets of its development and implementation. Kia ora tatou.