Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:616;Page:12432] 
1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: What is the total taxpayer cost to date for all legal costs prison costs court costs and any other costs associated with Ahmed Zaoui since his arrival in December 2002 and has he consulted with all his ministerial colleagues to ensure the figure given does not exclude any associated taxpayer costs? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Minister of Immigration) 
:  
The exact taxpayer cost to date associated with the Ahmed Zaoui case is not available because some costs are yet to be determined. However an estimate to date is $247000. This figure comprises the cost of imprisonment refugee status determination and legal aid. The exact cost in relation to this case will not be known until a final decision is made. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why did he not answer the question “to date”—not “when it is known” but “to date” in its exactitude—and having said that why are hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent on Ahmed Zaoui who was convicted by two separate superior courts in France and Belgium for passport fraud and terrorist activities when article 1F(b) of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees stipulates quite clearly that where a refugee claimant has committed a serious crime outside the country of refuge that claimant is automatically disqualified from being granted refugee status? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Firstly I thought I gave the member an estimate to date because I said that many of the costs will not be able to be determined until the end of the case. But I can say that Mr Zaoui has been determined to be a refugee under the convention the member talks about. As a refugee he can be deported only if he is a danger to national security or to the community. Mr Zaoui is subject to a security risk certificate. This certificate cannot be used to deport Mr Zaoui unless and until the Inspector-General reviews and confirms the security risk certificate and I as the Minister of Immigration have also decided to rely finally on the certificate. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: What discussions has the Minister had with the Prime Minister on a new appointment of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security so that the whole business of Mr Zaoui can be dealt with once and for all? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: The appointment of the Inspector-General is a matter for the Prime Minister and I presume that some decision will be made in due course. 
Keith Locke 
: How much has the Government spent so far on its three unsuccessful High Court cases: the first to stop the SIS having to provide a summary of its accusations against Mr Zaoui; the second to keep Mr Greig as Inspector-General; and the third to stop the Inspector-General from having to take into account Mr Zaoui’s human rights in its determination; and will the Government save the country money and not prolong Mr Zaoui’s determination by cancelling its appeal to the Court of Appeal on the latter case? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: As I said there are a number of costs still to be determined. On the second point the reality is that a process is under way and we should wait to see the outcome of it. 
Marc Alexander 
: Has the Minister considered my suggestion that Mr Zaoui be freed into the 24/7 custody of his supporters such as Keith Locke and Matt Robson who could guarantee to be with him at all times and meet his accommodation food and legal costs while he is in their care to free the taxpayer of this unwarranted financial burden? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Yes I have seen that suggestion which I would describe as interesting. I have had a discussion with my colleague the Minister of Corrections and he advises that Mr Zaoui is in the most appropriate place according to legal requirements. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave for the course of action being proposed to be approved by this House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member can seek leave for anything. Is there any objection? There is. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given that we are signatories to that UN convention and given that that UN convention clearly rules out this man—who is a terrorist and proven to be so in three jurisdictions and in Africa as well—what on earth is he doing in this country at the expense now of over a quarter of a million dollars to the New Zealand taxpayer? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: Yes the member is right—there is an exclusion clause. But the Refugee Status Appeals Authority has determined in its report that the exclusion should not apply in this case and that is why there is a process under way as we speak. 
Keith Locke 
: I seek leave to table the determination of the Refugee Status Appeals Authority which Mr Peters— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that determination. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: It has been done before. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It has not been— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is still objection. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why is the Minister seeking refuge behind the Refugee Status Appeals Authority when because of the convention this man should never even have got there in the first place to begin his long and troubled journey of tackling every official security agency of this country at our and the taxpayers’ expense when he is a terrorist and a fraudster? 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I am not hiding behind the Refugee Status Appeals Authority. The reality is that there is a security risk certificate out and it will be reviewed at some stage. That is the process that is happening at the moment.