Bennett David: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bennett David: Immigration Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 03 May 2012. Volume:679;Page:1955. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 Today we discuss the Immigration Amendment Bill which the last party to speak the Labour Party said it will oppose. It is very disappointing because members of this House would have expected most parties to agree on this especially parties that have New Zealand’s best interests in their heart. When we look at the context of immigration it is a very vocal and emotive subject and people have a lot of opinions on it. But essentially New Zealand survives on immigration. It is a big part of the history of our country. It is also a big part of the future of our country as we have many migrants in our country and we have many migrants in this House who have made New Zealand their home and have found that it has been very successful for them as a place to live.  
Migration is one of those things that will be important for our region. As part of the Asia-Pacific region we will see that there will be increasing trends of migration within this region. We will see a very successful Asian regional economy on our doorstep which will enable people to have money and then choices. With money and choices people will look for lifestyle. New Zealand has the opportunity I guess to pick the best migrants from that region but also that has some risks because people will see New Zealand as an opportunity as a country that has a low population has a clean green environment and has a very strong social system. Our education and health systems would not be comparable to many other Asian countries. Australia has found that to be a reality. From the areas of the subcontinent and through South-east Asia many people see Australia as very attractive because what does Australia offer? It offers a low population a large land mass and social services such as education and health care that are very difficult to obtain in those people’s country of origin.  
Naturally there is a desire to come to New Zealand and Australia. New Zealand and Australia will be the focal points for that growing population of people who will have the ability to make that transition out of their country of origin. The question then for New Zealand is whether we enable people to come to New Zealand and I do not think anybody in this House would say no that we do not want people to come to New Zealand because we need to have a growing population and new people bring in new values new histories and new diversity to our country that add to and build this country. But we have a choice of whom we bring into New Zealand. We need to make sure that we use and exercise that choice properly. We need to be able to bring in people who will add value to New Zealand in the sense that they have skills and are willing to make New Zealand their home and their future.  
Although we have a bit of choice as a Government as to whom we allow into New Zealand and how the individuals coming to New Zealand also have some choices. They have some choices about meeting the criteria to move to countries like New Zealand and Australia. The criteria are very simple. New Zealand and Australia will be looking for skilled migrants going forward. The policies that you see around migration are primarily based on having skills. Do you have the ability to speak English? Do you have the ability to— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Does the individual have the ability to provide skills to the country and also to develop New Zealand into a stronger place? When you look at that policy decision we have in migration this bill becomes very important. It sends a signal about what New Zealand seeks and it also sends a signal— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: That we are a soft touch. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: The member over there says that New Zealand is a soft touch so I look forward to him supporting this bill. This bill shows that we are not a soft touch but I do not know whether he is going to support it. He is talking about— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It’s a dog-whistle bill. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Oh now it is about democracy. A minute ago it was that we are not allowed to be seen as a soft touch. This bill tightens the rules around that issue yet the member over there will not support it. Now tell me how that works. Tell me whether there is the degree of strength of conviction that we should see from the New Zealand First Party a party whose name is based around issues such as this when that member does not want to see a tightening of these rules.  
The other side of this bill is that we have to take into account the many migrants who have come to New Zealand and make a lot of sacrifices to come here. The thousands of people who learn the English language who make sure they have the skills to come to New Zealand—those people need to be treated with respect for the sacrifice they have made to make New Zealand their home. If we do not give them that reward in the sense of their becoming New Zealand residents and citizens—for learning the English language and bringing those skills to New Zealand—we send them the wrong signal as well. I think it is important for those migrants who have come to New Zealand to see fairness and equity within the New Zealand system and not to see some people bypass them in the system just because they got on a boat and came through a process like that.  
When we look at this legislation we must look at the signals it will send to the migrants who are here and the migrants who intend to come here. When we look at the legislation we look at other countries that are in a similar boat like Australia. They have looked at this issue as something they have had to deal with. The Australians have had to deal with it as an issue right on their doorstep now. In New Zealand we do not have to deal with it right on our doorstep as we are not as close to those regions as Australia is. But it will come. At some point it will come. If we are not prepared then we will be in trouble and part of being in this Government and being in Parliament is to be prepared.  
Andrew Williams 
: You’ll blame the Christchurch earthquake for that as well. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: And we will be prepared and it is in the best interests of New Zealand that we be prepared for this going forward.  
Andrew Williams 
: For the earthquake? 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Opposition members are talking about being prepared for an earthquake. Well if they have a crystal ball then that would be great to see. We look forward to their supporting this legislation rather than being contrary to it as we normally expect. This legislation is good for New Zealand because it prepares our country for any future situations that may arise. We need to have some rules and regulations in place. This bill is good for New Zealand in that it sends the right signals to those people who see New Zealand as their future. It shows that we are an open country but we are open only if you fulfil the rules and regulations—that is if you have the skills and you fulfil the immigration rules and you do not try to use the process in a way that is not fair to those who have made those sacrifices and those who are willing to make those sacrifices in the future. It also shows that we are a country open to migration because that is part of our future and our history. It is very important— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: What’s that got to do with the bill? 
DAVID BENNETT 
: —it is important—because New Zealand was built on migration and it is going to be a big part of our future and we cannot discount that. We need to recognise the importance of migration in our future and we need to recognise the importance of that in regard to people who make the right choices and do the right things and not on the basis of some kind of perception of what may be the case.  
The Immigration Amendment Bill is a good bill. It sends the right signals it protects New Zealand for the future and we look forward to other parties voting in favour of this legislation as they should.