Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:633;Page:5055] 
3.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Is it correct that the manager of the Apia branch of the New Zealand Immigration Service Mr James Dalmer contacted the immigration intelligence unit with information about Thai nationals’ involvement with Taito Phillip Field; if so on how many occasions did that happen? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Associate Minister of Immigration) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Immigration 
: Yes I am advised that there were four occasions on which communication occurred. Of those three mentioned Mr Field by name. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: If as the Minister has just advised the House the branch manager in Apia communicated at least four times with the immigration intelligence unit if Mr Dalmer actually discussed with the manager of the immigration intelligence unit on or about 10 May specific issues involving Thais working without pay on Mr Field’s house in Samoa and being promised work in New Zealand in return and if all of that is correct how does he explain that information being withheld from the Associate Minister Damien O’Connor if in fact it was withheld? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am advised that this was because the information they were dealing with was unconfirmed—that is there was a possibility it was wrong. I also say to that member again—and I point to the Ingram inquiry—that the Ingram inquiry quite clearly stated that the Associate Minister of Immigration at the time made the decision unaware of the information because it had not been passed on to him. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Was Noel Ingram QC able to reach a firm conclusion as to whether the Associate Minister Damien O’Connor knew of the allegations in relation to Mr Siriwan’s involvement with Mr Field in Samoa prior to his decision to issue a special direction for a work visa for Mr Siriwan or was Mr Ingram’s conclusion that “real uncertainty results from the available evidence as to when Mr O’Connor became aware of the allegations in relation to Mr Field.”? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: In response I make two points on behalf of the Minister. As I previously told the House I am advised that the inquiry concludes that the Associate Minister did not have the relevant information at the time he made the decision on the Siriwan case. I refer the member to paragraphs 157 and 158 on pages 49-50 of the Ingram report. Further Mr Ingram goes on to note in paragraph 179 that the original “decision by Mr O’Connor may be regarded as a justifiable exercise of that broad discretionary … power.” 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is it correct that the “possible sequence of events surrounding Mr O’Connor being informed of the allegations” constructed by Mr Ingram required Mr O’Connor’s immigration secretary Ms Nicola Scotland to forget a logged 5 minute - long phone call at 2.41 p.m. on 9 June from the group manager for service international of the Department of Labour where he discussed with her whether Mr O’Connor was aware of the information received and all the circumstances involved regarding the Thai nationals in Samoa when he apparently made his decisions following discussions with Taito Phillip Field—decisions Nicola Scotland knew were still pending—a possible sequence of events requiring her to forget that information which she knew to be crucial? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: It has been accepted by the Ingram inquiry that what is most likely to have occurred in this instance is that the Minister’s private secretary was informed but did not pass that information on to the Minister because it was unconfirmed. That is what the Ingram inquiry concluded. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is it remotely credible that Ms Nicola Scotland Mr O’Connor’s immigration secretary would not have passed on the crucial information she received from Mr Tavita service international group manager on 9 June when earlier on 27 May compliance officer Murray Gardiner had emailed her directly with information about the goings-on involving Taito Phillip Field in Samoa—Mr Ingram’s possible sequence of events requiring her to have forgotten to pass on that information to Mr O’Connor as well if she did in fact forget? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: As I have just pointed out to the member the inquiry accepted that the most likely events to have occurred in this instance are that the Minister’s private secretary was informed but did not pass that information on to the Minister. Those are the findings of the inquiry and of Noel Ingram QC. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How does the Minister explain the file note of his Apia branch manager Mr James Dalmer that records: “Knowledge of Thai cases—knows that Taito had these people working for him—Damien knew that before he made the decision—tight labour market has been a factor.”? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I simply reiterate the findings of Noel Ingram QC as I have previously stated. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is the reason that Mr James Dalmer Apia branch manager told the Ingram inquiry that “his best recollection is that Ms Scotland stated that Mr O’Connor knew of the information before he made his decision.” because it is the truth? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I reiterate my previous answer. The findings are clear in Noel Ingram QC’s inquiry.