Dalziel Lianne: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dalziel Lianne: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6717] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 I move  
That the Immigration Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
 It is my intention to move that the bill be referred to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and that the committee have authority to meet on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions and during an evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 193 and 196(1)(b) and (c); and that the committee report back to the House on or before 25 August 2003. 
This bill will allow the Government to deliver on its commitment made at the last election to shift New Zealand from being a passive recipient of skilled migrants to a country that assesses what our needs are and goes out to the world to actively recruit those who meet those needs. This bill does that by setting up a much more flexible legislative framework around which skilled immigration policy is established. This means moving away from the Immigration Act’s current entitlement model where applicants who meet set criteria must be approved residence towards a model where New Zealand’s needs are paramount. This is what the skilled stream was always designed to do. However it has failed at the implementation stage to achieve that goal. 
Prior to the 1991 points-based general category being introduced the focus was on occupational priorities so this stream of migrants was intended to ensure that migrants matched New Zealand’s skill shortages. Unfortunately the shift to the points system moved the emphasis from New Zealand’s actual priorities in terms of skill shortages to the assumed employability and potential contribution of the migrant. This was the policy that gave us the doctors driving taxis scenario—something the Government of the day took 4 years to address. Other policy changes in the 1990s and the unwillingness of the Government of the day to focus on settlement outcomes meant skilled migrants came to New Zealand without a glimmer of hope of ever finding opportunities to match their skills their talent and their experience. 
Some of those very people who came in under other Governments are struggling today. In fact the  
Sunday Star-Times  
on 22 June just 2 weeks ago ran a story about Jeffrey Zhang and Helen He Chinese immigrants to New Zealand 48 and 45 years of age. I quote Mr Zhang: “When we came here it was a new beginning. We had to struggle for life. We didn’t have high ambition for a luxurious life.” The article goes on to state: “Just as well. He has more tertiary qualifications than you’ll likely find in an average Kiwi street but can find work only as a kitchen or factory hand. … Zhang has six tertiary qualifications if you count three years’ PhD study in Sweden. He’s switched from social sciences to business studies to make him more employable—an MBA from Canberra and since immigrating here 3 years ago management and accounting qualifications from Massey University and Auckland University of Technology. Zhang has done the rounds of universities (he was an associate professor at a Shanghai university and is the author of six academic books) and banks. All without luck. The longest jobs he’s had were for a company making kitchens and as a salesman of timeshares. The former went broke after six months and the latter turned out to be shonky. His wife a university lecturer in China is studying early childhood education. She wants to work as a kindergarten teacher. She and their son work part-time in restaurants.” 
That is what the skilled immigration policy of the 1990s did to migrants and that is what it offered New Zealand. This policy is about addressing that for the sake of the migrants and for the sake of New Zealand. The Immigration Amendment Bill is about turning the policy around so that we get the best of both worlds. We retain the points system but we now have bonus points that emphasise New Zealand’s needs and we prioritise potential migrants with the greatest potential to meet those needs. 
This bill is not about immigration numbers. The Government is committed to an ongoing and stable immigration programme now and into the future and has recently decided to maintain the annual programme at 45000 places for 2003-04. This bill is about skilled migrants who make up 60 percent of the programme—and I know that the National Party wants to increase that to 70 percent of the programme which may be something that we can look at in the future—because of the changes this Government brought in. There was no such emphasis under the National Government. It is important that those who come under this category are selected by us on their ability to settle well and to make a contribution to New Zealand. The bill allows New Zealand to manage immigration applications effectively by providing that residence applications from skilled migrants can be by way of invitation only. Currently all applications must be accepted and when the pass mark is met we have to grant residence. We do not have any choice in the matter even when we have very good reason to believe that there will not be a good settlement outcome. We will now be able to recruit and select migrants whom we need and whom we know will settle well here. 
Additionally the bill establishes the concept of expressions of interest as a preliminary step for skilled people interested in applying for residence. Only those who meet a minimum threshold will be able to register an expression of interest which is much preferable to the changing pass mark that manages numbers at the moment. It has gone from the early 20s to the early 30s over a decade. What sort of stability is that? We have a set pass mark that people will have to surpass. That is the threshold for registering the expression of interest and I am glad that New Zealand First is supportive of that. Those expressing interest will be ranked and those with the best ability in terms of employability and capacity building—we will be looking at the effects on the regions as well—will be invited to apply. There will be bonus points in the system for people who have job offers outside Auckland and for people who are meeting New Zealand’s skill shortage needs. 
Under the provisions of the bill the Residence Appeal Authority is renamed the Residence Review Board and new review procedures are established for some people whose applications are declined. Specifically it restricts reviews to the Residence Review Board to applications that are lodged in New Zealand unless offshore applicants have a New Zealand employer or family sponsor who agrees to support the review. It is inconsistent with an immigration policy that focuses on New Zealand’s needs to allow individuals with no connection to New Zealand an opportunity to access a subsidised review system. It clarifies that only those skilled applicants invited to apply for residence can seek a review of a declined decision and it prevents those applicants who have submitted false or misleading information or who have withheld relevant information from seeking a review. 
This is the most significant change to skilled immigration policy in more than a decade and it will be welcomed by all sectors of the community. I know that it will be welcomed by the business community as it meets the objectives that community has established for innovation and growth. I know that it will be welcomed by the union movement as unions have been concerned about skilled migrants who are forced into unskilled and semi-skilled work undercutting wages and conditions of employment. It will be welcomed by well-settled ethnic communities who have seen newer members faced with insurmountable barriers. I know that it will be welcomed by the good immigration consultants who provide or have links with post-arrival settlement programmes because they are already working on an outcomes basis with a recruitment focus. The only people who will complain will be the other immigration consultants who think their job is done when the residence permit is stamped in the passport. Those people have nothing to offer New Zealand and what we are trying to achieve through this change in policy is ensuring that we have a win-win for skilled migrants and for New Zealand. I commend the bill to the House.