9. Question No. 9—ImmigrationERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) (remote) to the Minister of ImmigrationQuestion No. 9—Immigration9. ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) (remote) to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by his statement that a humanitarian visa for Ukrainians with family members living in New Zealand is not necessary"; if so can he explain which visa those Ukrainian family members can apply for?Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Immigration) (remote): Yes in the context in which it was given. Partners and dependents of Ukrainian nationals who are citizens or residents are able to apply for visas to travel to New Zealand to be with their families. As I have previously said Immigration New Zealand have been giving priority processing of visas for Ukrainian nationals. And furthermore the Government today announced a fast-track border exemption that will enable Ukrainian nationals with a New Zealand visa the ability to travel here. For those Ukrainians in New Zealand on temporary visas that are set to expire this year Cabinet has also agreed to an automatic extension to those visas for 12 months given the dangerous situation for them at home. We also recognise that there are other family members of Ukrainian New Zealanders who may need to travel to New Zealand and the Government is working through options that that could take. It is a distressing time for Ukrainians around the world and it is important to note that advice that we are receiving from international partners is clear that displaced Ukrainians want this conflict to end so they can return home.Erica Stanford: Point of order Mr Speaker. The primary question was very clear and asked specifically for—can he explain which visa the Ukrainian family members can apply for and he did not address that part of the question.SPEAKER: Well I think actually he referred to three separate areas in which they could make an application and said that he was working on others as well.Erica Stanford: When wider family members like parents can only use the compassionate entry exceptions criteria of a critical purpose visitor visa how can their applications be approved when those instructions were changed late last year to require the humanitarian crisis or family trauma to be occurring in New Zealand and explicitly not offshore?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: That is just one potential path that Ukrainian nationals can take. As I have said in the response to my primary answer the Government is working through further options that it may take in order to assist further family members who are in Ukraine to come to New Zealand. We hope to come to a decision on that soon. There are other measures that people could take that the member is well aware of that in a humanitarian sense some people can take at the moment.Erica Stanford: Why has he not been able to urgently create a simple easy-to-use humanitarian visa for wider family members in the Ukraine instead of relying on an unfit-for-purpose existing visa that desperate Ukrainians can't even find online let alone understand?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: What New Zealand wants is a Government that is compassionate a Government that acts and a Government that before it commits to something it does the work to make sure that it can deliver. We are acting around the decisions that we have announced already today around the border exemption and the extension of visas to those Ukrainians here in New Zealand. And as I say the Government is working through more options and stands ready to act to make sure we can assist in the humanitarian effort to respond to what is happening in Ukraine at the moment.Ricardo Menéndez March (remote): Will the Minister grant Ukraine visa waiver status as Canada has done to enable the prompt reunification of families and give safe passage for Ukrainians fleeing war?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: As I've mentioned in the primary answer and in the response to supplementaries the Government is working through options to see what more it can do to respond to the Ukrainian situation. We want to make sure that we are responding in a way that is compassionate but also in a way that we know we've worked through the likes of eligibility and implications of any decision we make.Erica Stanford: What does the Minister say to Maria and Alex who appeared on TV1 Breakfast today who are trying to get Maria's elderly mother out of the Ukraine but could not find any application forms online and were unable to reach Immigration New Zealand on the phone because of long delays; and does he think he should be doing more to get wider family members to New Zealand urgently?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: To the last part of the member's question as I've said a number of times this afternoon the Government is currently considering further options about what it can do to assist families who are affected by this situation in Ukraine.Erica Stanford: Why is it that other countries around the world are able to instigate humanitarian visas urgently to get desperate Ukrainian family members out of Ukraine when he is sitting on his hands looking for more—SPEAKER: Order! The member knows that's out of order. Does the member want a further supplementary? Erica Stanford.Erica Stanford: How can the Minister have said earlier in answer to my question that he knows very well I know of visa options for family members like parents when he then later stated in another question that he's still working on those visas for wider family members?Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The member knows in the most extreme of humanitarian situations that the likes of members of Parliament can apply for visas for individuals in those situations and I will reiterate as the member has in her question the Government is working on further options as we do stand ready to ensure that we can respond to the humanitarian issues coming out of Ukraine.Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order. In granting leave for Nicola Willis to table some documents some emails just a few moments ago the House received an assurance that those documents were not publicly available.SPEAKER: No the House didn't receive that. The member gave an assurance that to the best of her knowledge they weren't. The fact that she's wrong—if the member's suggesting she's wrong then I think we shouldn't take it any further. Members are quite often wrong in this House and every time they're wrong they shouldn't be subject to a point of order.Hon Chris Hipkins: Speaking further to the point of order it took me two minutes to discover that the member was wrong. If a member's going to seek leave for a course of action surely there is an obligation on them to make sure that they're on solid ground before they seek leave and before they indicate to the House that they want to take particular course of action that requires the unanimous consent of the House in order for that to happen.SPEAKER: I think what the member knows is absolutely right and what this member may learn or other members should learn from this is that if they want members to accept them tabling documents in the future they should make sure that they do not mislead the House as the member did albeit through ignorance and not deliberately.David Seymour: Point of order. Mr Speaker you've just said the Minister has misled the House through ignorance. Have you checked the facts that those documents are publicly available before making that assertion?SPEAKER: No I haven't. I rely on the word of the Leader of the House something which I find I can do unlike some other members.David Seymour: Point of order. Was what you just said an insinuation that you can't rely on my word and if so can you give an example of that?SPEAKER: No it wasn't but if the member feels guilty he might want to.David Seymour: Point of order. Mr Speaker I just want to make it clear I don't feel guilty at all but you often go well beyond your brief with those kinds of insinuations and that's why—SPEAKER: Order!David Seymour:—it needs to be called out.SPEAKER: The member will leave the House.David Seymour withdrew from the Chamber. Chris Bishop: Point of order. It's a well-established principle of this Parliament since the establishment of the Parliament that all members are honourable and the words they say in this House are to be taken with the degree of honour that the words are appropriate for for members who are in this House. Is it now your position that you can rely more on the words of the Leader of the House than other members and if so why is that and would you like to explicate for the House who those members that you can't rely on are?SPEAKER: The member tempts me."