Beaumont Carol: Immigration Bill — Third Reading 
Beaumont Carol: Immigration Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7653] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak in support of the third reading of the Immigration Bill and I acknowledge the fact that this is a very comprehensive rewrite of what is quite complicated legislation and a complex area of policy. One of the things I am aware of is the extensive consultation process that has been undertaken over a period of some years. I think the bill probably reflects what we would hope is best practice if you like in the development of legislation. The history is that in April 2006 the previous Labour Government published a discussion document on a review of immigration. Submissions were called for and key options for change were considered as part of that review. Officials travelled the country and talked to people about those options and I understand that over 650 people attended meetings. Almost 4000 submissions were received as part of that process from migrant organisations community organisations unions employers and national and key international human rights organisations. That is quite amazing because that process then helped to contribute to the bill which then went through the select committee process. 
The Transport and Industrial Relations Committee received 90 submissions from interested groups and individuals and heard 61 submissions. That included hearing submissions in Auckland. As others have done I would put on record the work of Vui Mark Gosche in relation to this bill. This is not an easy area of work. There are many competing demands in immigration: making sure that national interests and security interests are balanced up against the interests of those who come to this country and making sure that the rights of those people are protected. It is never easy to get that balance right. I know as somebody who made a submission on the bill—I was not in Parliament at the time—that there were many complex matters to look at. 
The bill is framework legislation and that is quite deliberately the case in order to enable it to capture core concepts and processes without being unduly weighed down with particularities that may quickly become outdated. I want to talk a little more about the purpose of the bill and some of the key elements. The objective is to establish a stronger more flexible and enduring foundation for New Zealand’s immigration system and to manage immigration in a fair and balanced way. Changes have been made to include a new visa system the ability to use classified information international protections a single appeals tribunal a more transparent deportation system flexible compliance and enforcement powers and so on. 
The bill as I have mentioned was introduced by the previous Labour Government and it is now going through the House under a National Government. There was a great deal of cooperation I think to get to the point we are at now. It is the biggest rewrite of immigration law for over two decades and it will replace the Immigration Act 1987. The previous Government introduced this bill because it recognised the realities of the global labour market and also the risks in the modern security environment and it was trying to balance those interests. It is clear to all of us in this House I am sure that people are moving around the world at unprecedented levels as tourists students workers and permanent migrants. That provides challenges and opportunities. 
New Zealand is a country of migrants as many members have already reflected on. We are a stronger country because of the successive waves of people that have come here. One thing that I think is particularly interesting about New Zealand in terms of immigration is that one in four of the people who are working in this country were born somewhere else and one in six of the people who were born here are working somewhere else. That is actually a very interesting thing because it means—and this is different from the situation in a number of other countries—that New Zealand is both a country of origin for migrants and a country of destination for migrants. Both elements are substantial for us. I am also sure that the members of this House would all recognise the importance and value of immigration for our country. Migrants coming to New Zealand bring their skills they bring their links back to their home country they bring investment and they bring cultural diversity. They strengthen our country. I have always found it of real concern to hear people whip up anti-migrant sentiment. They somehow imply that New Zealand is doing migrants a favour by letting them come and live here. Well nothing could be further from the truth. Any objective analysis of the balance will show that in fact the balance is to the benefit of this country for all of the reasons that I have just given. 
I think it is worth putting it on the record as part of this discussion that the reason that many people migrate is to have a better quality of life or to find more opportunity—a better opportunity for themselves and their families. One of the real factors behind migration around the world is poverty or the desire of people to try to gain a better standard of living. It concerns me that already this Government in relation to the issue of poverty has changed the focus of NZAID away from poverty elimination. I wonder about the implications of that for migration— 
Darien Fenton 
: And what that message sends to other countries. 
CAROL BEAUMONT 
: Yes what my colleague says is right. 
We have to stay in the race in order to attract people to come to our country. We need to have a modern immigration system but we need also to protect our borders from those who could potentially threaten us. We need to strike the right balance between allowing us to choose the people whom we want and need to protect our national interests and ensuring that we can protect our borders and successfully fulfil our international obligations. New Zealand has a reputation as a country that honours international agreements; it actually supports the work of multilateral agencies and abides by the guidelines and best practice in this area. Certainly in the area of migration a lot of work is currently going on regarding the sorts of frameworks that we should have and from my previous experience I know that the best practice is to have a rights-based framework. It is about making sure that the people who are moving around the world are treated with respect and that they do have rights. 
Each year in this country 2.5 million people cross our borders. One of the reasons why we have quite robust immigration and actively seek out migrants is to provide skills as I have previously mentioned. I place it on the record that I think that it will be necessary to continue to seek out migrants perhaps at even greater levels because we are failing in the skills area. The current Government is failing to address our country’s skills need. At a time of economic recession when it could really invest in people and really generate a much more knowledgeable and well-skilled population what is going on? The answer is nothing. The truly shocking aspect of our Budget this year was that there were no new initiatives in the skills area and that much of the very very good work that had been done by the previous Government in terms of developing the Skills Strategy and looking at some very comprehensive programmes like Schools Plus has been completely ignored. 
I have yet to see anything come out of the Government to try to address skills and to invest in our own people in this country to ensure that we have the skills we need. We have major skills deficits; there is no doubt about that. We have skills deficits in many technical areas. So the Government could have really taken the opportunity when people have been struggling when people have been made unemployed—thousands and thousands of people have become unemployed—to put a lot of money into providing them with positive hope for their futures and doing something that would be good for our economy.