Lees-Galloway Iain: Annual Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Annual Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 April 2016. Volume:713;Page:10506. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): With the couple of minutes I have remaining before the dinner break I would like to briefly discuss the immigration services aspect of the annual review of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. The Commerce Committee looked particularly at the Investor Plus category and questioned I think quite rightly the lack of oversight of that particular category. It was concerning to discover under questioning that the ministry officials have actually got no idea what the impact of the Investor Plus category has been on the New Zealand economy. They do not know how many jobs if any have been created by the Investor Plus category. They do not know what the people who have come into New Zealand under the Investor Plus category have gone on to actually contribute to New Zealand’s economy. I think it is an appalling lack of oversight for a new category that this Government introduced.The Government claimed that it was going to add huge economic benefit to New Zealand that it would put people of extreme wealth to the front of the immigration queue ahead of other people looking to come into New Zealand only because they are extremely wealthy. The Government claimed that that was going to have a massively positive impact on New Zealand yet it is not prepared to actually monitor that in any way and to actually produce any data that tells us whether the Investor Plus category is working or not. There have been allegations that the Investor Plus category has been used for money-laundering.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Before the dinner break I was talking about the Commerce Committee’s report into the review of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and particularly the section that pertained to Immigration New Zealand. In that report some of the members raised concerns about the Investor Plus category the lack of oversight of that category and the lack of information telling us whether or not the Government’s intentions for setting up that category for setting up the system whereby wealthy migrants get to jump to the front of the queue ahead of everybody else was actually working in New Zealand’s interest.One of the signs that there might be some issues with this category is the report that we got earlier this year that police investigated two American investors who brought their money into New Zealand through the Investor Plus scheme but then withdrew their money into a different account whence it came before they gained residency in New Zealand. What the police were interested in was whether this was money-laundering. Was New Zealand’s immigration system being used to launder money? The bit that concerns me is that Immigration New Zealand did not pick up on this. It was not Immigration New Zealand that looked into this; it was the police who looked into this after I think a tip off from the bank where the money had been moved to. So I do not think that Immigration New Zealand’s oversight of that particular category is up to muster.I think the Government should be resourcing Immigration New Zealand and asking it to take a much closer look to make sure that the Investor Plus category is actually working in New Zealand’s best interests because an immigration system that works in New Zealand’s best interests is an immigration system that works for us as the host country and also works for the migrants themselves so that they get good outcomes. It is not just the Investor Plus category that Immigration New Zealand is not looking closely enough at; in fact it is all the categories. We do not actually know what the outcomes are for a lot of migrants.I looked particularly at the skilled migrant category. What we do know—not from research done by Immigration New Zealand but from outside research that has been done—is that around 90 percent of people who apply to come to New Zealand under the skilled migrant category get work after 6 months and that sounds quite good on the face of it. What we do not know is whether or not they actually get work in the area for which they are skilled. I look at two examples. I had a long conversation with a bloke who came from Egypt. He is a civil engineer he has been in New Zealand for over a year and he cannot get work. He came to New Zealand under the impression that he was wanted here. He came to New Zealand under the impression that he had a skill that New Zealand needed and yet he cannot get work. I have to ask whether our immigration system is working if people who come to New Zealand under the skilled migrant system are not able to get work.