Moroney Sue: Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill — In Committee 
Moroney Sue: Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:638;Page:8657] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 This is a good opportunity to be able to contribute to the debate on the Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill. The Labour Party supports this bill. It is a Government bill. I was on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee which heard the submissions on this bill so it is wonderful to see it come through to its Committee stage and I also look forward to the bill reaching its third and final reading. 
I have been interested to hear some of the other contributions to this debate. Many of them were made yesterday because today’s debate is the continuation of the interrupted debate on the Committee stage of the bill. It was interesting to note that both yesterday and today when Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith took a call on this bill he took his time to raise all sorts of issues but not once did he raise an issue that he has subsequently constantly interjected on which is the issue of wanting some answers from Taito Phillip Field on his involvement in immigration issues. It is very interesting that Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith chose not to take his formal speaking time in the Chamber to raise that issue yet continues to make interjections about it. He did not interject when his colleague David Bennett talked about “9.30 o’clock” in his contribution to this debate last evening but that is another story. 
I want to talk about how important the introduction of this bill is. It is not a minute too soon. It is certainly not a minute too soon for those people who have been in a very vulnerable position at the hands of immigration advisers at a very vulnerable time in their lives. Those people have been looking for professional competent advice at a time when it makes a big difference to the decisions they are about to make. They have a right to good competent advice on the immigration procedures in this country and on their likelihood of being able to immigrate here successfully. This bill ensures that a much more professional approach will be taken to the advice that people receive in that regard. 
For all of those people who are subject to that advice this bill is coming before this House not a minute too soon. It is good to see that we were able to progress it at reasonable speed but not with undue haste through the select committee process because this bill has a profound effect on people’s lives at a time when they are very vulnerable and need to make sure they get absolutely the appropriate advice. 
We heard in the select committee submissions and I have certainly heard in my role as a local member of Parliament in the Waikato area many sad stories from people who have come to this country in good faith on the advice of immigration advisers in the belief that they had a very good chance of immigrating successfully and integrating into New Zealand society. They have found that they have integrated very well into society but sometimes they have subsequently found that the advice they received at the outset was not correct which causes all sorts of harm and disruption. In fact people feel quite traumatised by having made significant financial decisions to come to this country and then subsequently finding out that the advice they were given at the outset was not correct and that they did not meet the criteria for becoming resident in this country. 
This bill creates a new framework for the regulation of individuals providing immigration advice both onshore and offshore. It is important that we cover both areas because they are where people receive their advice from. The framework is critical to managing the growing immigration advice industry. One of the very interesting things we discovered in the select committee was that the industry is both formal and informal. We had a lot of interesting discussions about that issue and had to make some decisions about the types of people who were giving immigration advice. They stretch from lawyers who of course are governed by other Acts of Parliament all the way down to family members and other well-meaning people giving immigration advice to a whole range of people trying to make decisions sometimes not based on the best advice. It was one of the many very difficult issues to deal with in addressing this bill. 
The legislation will bring New Zealand into line with other countries such as Australia and Britain. That is important because I think the more consistency we have on this issue the better and the less confusion there will be for people operating in this field of immigration advice. This bill in raising the standard of immigration advice will promote and protect the interests of migrants and potential migrants who receive immigration advice. That will therefore enhance the reputation of New Zealand as a migration destination. It really does harm our reputation as a migration destination if immigration advice is not appropriate. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
SUE MORONEY 
: Before the dinner break I was talking about my support for this bill and about my involvement in the select committee process and getting it through to the Committee stage that we are now debating.  
I make particular reference to the very fine work the officials did on this bill. As I said before the select committee had some very difficult issues to deal with. Although the bill seemed straightforward at the outset as do many of these bills it became more and more complicated as we went along the process. We had issues to debate and discuss around lawyers and whether they should be caught in the requirements of this bill or whether Acts of Parliament that already covered them were sufficient. We had to consider whether payment for advice was the issue we should be regulating around or whether the issue was the provision of advice per se. There were a range of issues that we looked to the officials for advice on in terms of the evidence and practice out in the community. We certainly received very good advice from the officials on those matters. 
The Transport and Industrial Relations Committee made some recommendations to change aspects of the bill—mostly minor and technical changes. Those recommendations include establishing the Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal which is to be independent of the Immigration Advisers Authority and for the tribunal to be administratively supported by the Ministry of Justice. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: It is sad to see a Government filibustering because it has no work to do. 
SUE MORONEY 
: That was Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith who took a call on this part of the bill yesterday. He did not ask any questions of Taito Phillip Field with regard to this matter but he has been quite interested in interjecting about it ever since. I invite Dr Smith to approach Taito Phillip Field and ask him the questions he so obviously wants to ask during the debate on this bill. This bill is about regulating immigration advisers. If the member has questions to ask of a particular member of Parliament—an Independent member—perhaps he would like to address those questions to that Independent member of Parliament. 
This Labour-led Government understands that a sustainable well-managed and balanced immigration programme is one of the keys to New Zealand’s economic transformation. This bill is part of that understanding. I have no hesitation in recommending the bill at the Committee stage. Thank you.