te Heuheu Georgina: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6788] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (NZ National) 
: I want to take a call on clause 3 and if I have time possibly to make some comments on clause 4 as well although with regard to that clause I support the sentiments expressed by the Hon Ken Shirley. Coming back to clause 3 however I note that this clause as we now know from previous contributions by members legislates to ensure that temporary or limited visas such as job-search visas cannot be classed as residence visas. That has the effect of over-riding the court case because if job-search visas are not residence visas then section 13 of the Immigration Act does not apply to those 40000 or so or is it 6000 or so— 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Forty-six thousand people; 20000 applications. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: —20000 applications and 46000 people. Then section 13 of the Immigration Act does not apply to those people. When the Minister took a call before she left the chair she explained the reason for clause 3. She said that it clarifies this very situation. In part the National Opposition agrees that if there is an anomaly or a situation that possibly does not fit into Government residence policy there are ways of dealing with that. There are legitimate ways of dealing with that sort of issue but this legislation is not one of them. 
Thousands of people started to wend their way through due process within our justice system to have what they saw as their legitimate rights clarified and Justice Randerson in the High Court gave a ruling that actually agreed with them in terms of the way the Government was behaving. Then as I said earlier we saw that they were fortified only temporarily when the Minister said that that was not a decision that was acceptable to this Government and that the Government would appeal it; but then within a very short space of time the Government changed its mind to take these draconian steps that we are debating today. And they are draconian. 
I felt like commenting when the Minister was on her feet: “Tell that to the 46000 people out there who for 2 years have been pursuing their applications.” They went into the court process—at great cost I might add—thinking it was fair enough that there were ways of dealing with the matter and that they would follow those processes only to find that in the end the sinister hand of the Government came in the axe came down and no matter what they were doing in any event they were ruled out. 
I wonder how this enhances the reputation of New Zealand. We are encouraging people to come here. I think members from all sides of the Chamber will agree that we need more people here. We need an immigration policy as my colleague said before that is transparent fair— 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Predictable. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: —predictable and consistent. We can certainly agree with that. But when we get the kind of shambolic management of this very important portfolio that the Minister has been guilty of what sort of reputation are we developing? It is a reputation that says we will ride roughshod over the legitimate rights of 46000 people. As Bill Milnes of the New Zealand Association for Migration and Investment said “The Minister is playing football with people’s lives.” Mind you I do not know whether the Minister can play football but that was his view. In other words she does not care really. She does not care that these people in good faith have made application for visas to New Zealand in the way they saw fit.