Woodhouse Michael: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third ReadingText is subject to correctionWoodhouse Michael: Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 30 April 2015. Volume:704;Page:3089. Text is subject to correction.]Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Immigration):I move That the Immigration Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. Immigration has always been vital to the growth and well-being of New Zealand and this bill includes a number of amendments that will ensure our immigration system remains fit for purpose supports the economic aims of New Zealand and better protects our borders. At the heart of this bill are the amendments to protect migrant workers from exploitation by cracking down on employers who exploit their migrant workers. New Zealand has an obligation to the migrants it brings here—the migrants who are contributing to our economic growth and who are helping us rebuild Canterbury.Unfortunately over the past few months we have heard many stories about migrant workers being exploited. We have heard stories from the Christchurch construction industry the Queenstown tourism industry and the Hamilton restaurant industry just to name a few. These migrant workers are not working unlawfully. They are here in New Zealand on work visas including working holiday and student visas with work rights.The amendments in this bill aim to stamp out the exploitation of migrant workers who are in New Zealand on temporary visas. Under the Immigration Act it is already an offence to exploit migrant workers who are not entitled to work and this bill will extend that offence to temporary visa holders who are entitled to work.This Government is sending a strong message to those unscrupulous employers who exploit workers and undercut their competitors. These employers could face up to 7 years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $100000. The Government is sending a message to these unprincipled employers that this is not OK.It is important that New Zealand has absolute control over who enters and stays in New Zealand especially in this era of heightened security risks. This bill contains a number of amendments that will strengthen our ability to protect our borders and ensure the integrity of our immigration system.The bill introduces changes to the Immigration Act that will accommodate a new model for the way passenger name record information is provided. It will improve the identification of travellers who may pose a risk or require further intervention. Changes to the way biometric information is collected will enable faster identification of individuals and improve the ministry’s ability to manage risks. These amendments will enable biometric information to be collected from persons already known to be liable for deportation or turn-round. It will enable a compulsion order to be sought on application from the District Court to require a person to allow their biometric information to be taken where that person is liable for deportation and has refused to allow biometric information to be collected from them. Where a compulsion order is made it will enable police to use reasonable force to take the biometric information under certain circumstances. This will help ensure a firm fast and fair deportation process for people who do not have the right to remain in New Zealand and it will enable biometric information to be collected from non-citizens arriving in New Zealand either before or after they have been granted entry permission and while they are still within the immigration control area.I want to summarise the amendments that are intended to improve the integrity of the immigration system. The bill will enable residence class visa holders to be liable for deportation where it is established that any of the information provided in relation to their application for a visa entry permission or any other visa was fraudulent false or misleading or relevant information was withheld. The system needs to be based on a true and accurate disclosure by its participants as cases that involve false or inaccurate disclosure erode the integrity of the system. This amendment creates a strong incentive for people to tell the truth in their application for a visa. It also extends the search powers of immigration officers. That will better enable them to do their job including their job of investigating migrant exploitation.One of the search powers that this bill will allow is the ability for trained and specialised immigration officers to search employers’ premises and interview employees in order to ascertain whether the employer and the employee are complying with the Immigration Act. Yes the search power is warrantless and yes the search power will allow immigration officers to search dwelling houses.I want to take a moment to point out a couple of details of these particular features as they have been the subject of criticism. Firstly the reason that the search power does not require a warrant is that immigration officers prior to visiting premises to investigate an employer who they believe is committing an offence under the Act will not know that workers may be hiding in part of the property. It does not make sense in these cases for the immigration officer to turn round and go to obtain a warrant as the workers will have vanished by the time the immigration officer returns. Secondly there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about the search of a dwelling house. It should be pointed out that in the context of this amendment an immigration officer needs to believe on reasonable grounds that the premises are owned occupied or used by the employer where it is believed that work is being done. So it is not just an ordinary residential home and we are talking only about searching for people.In addition to the search of an employer’s premises the bill contains three other search powers that will mean that immigration officers have the powers they need to effectively enforce the Immigration Act. Authorised and trained immigration officers will be able to apply for and execute a search warrant using the provisions of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. Until the transitional powers set out in that Act expired in June 2014 immigration officers could only apply for a search warrant. The amendment reinstates that power and adds the ability for the immigration officer to execute that warrant. They will be able to undertake a personal search and a search of baggage in the immediate control of the person at the border for the person’s passport or identity document where the officer has reasonable cause to suspect the passenger is concealing these documents. That power applies only to non - New Zealand citizens.I must once again put on record my disappointment in the lack of support for exploited migrants shown by Opposition parties by their failure to vote in favour of this bill. New Zealand First I can understand. They are now firmly established as New Zealand’s anti-immigration party. Mr Peters’ scurrilous description recently of migrants as “absolute crap” and his attack on the New Zealand resident recently killed in the Middle East are ample example of that. They do not pretend to be in favour of migrants or to be the champion of the migrant community but Labour and the Greens do. Their failure to support this bill past its first reading highlights that pretence.The bill’s primary purpose is to prevent and prosecute exploitative employers. So far the reasons given by Labour and the Greens for not supporting migrant workers include from Labour that the search powers are given to immigration officers and labour inspectors—well so what; that the immigration levy looks like a tax; that they thought a regulatory power that was taken out at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee remained; and that there are not enough labour inspectors.The Greens who prefaced their comments by describing the worst excesses of employers as “almost keeping slaves” thought it more appropriate to allow visa applicants to commit fraud on their applications without consequence and allow overstayers to thumb their noses at officials’ attempts to deport them by refusing access to travel documents. They said it was more important—more important—than preventing and prosecuting the exploitation of migrant workers.Many of those concerns were absolutely without foundation or were fixed by the select committee. Furthermore the bill comfortably passed its New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet the Ministry of Justice supports it the Council of Trade Unions—for goodness’ sake—supports it but Labour clearly did not get the memo. Labour and the Greens still have the opportunity to join with the Government. It is not too late for those parties to send a very clear signal that whatever their misgivings about the rats and mice details of this bill are they support preventing and prosecuting the exploitation of migrant workers. Their failure to do so says to me and it says to the migrant community that their faux support is just that—that they are more interested in the details than in the power to prevent and prosecute. I call on them to change their minds even at this last minute.I want to acknowledge the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee most recently ably led by Jonathan Young the submitters and especially the officials who have worked tirelessly to improve the lot of migrants in this country with the passage of this bill. I commend it to the House; I hope Labour and the Greens can also do so.