Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:646;Page:15412] 
11.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Immigration 
: Does he have confidence in the Government’s refugee determination processes and whether the answer be positive or negative why? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister of Immigration) 
 on behalf of the  
Associate Minister of Immigration 
: Yes because the Refugee Status Appeals Authority is independent of Ministers politicians and officials and its processes are well-documented proven and internationally respected. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in its presentation to the select committee on the immigration bill recommended that “the experience and high quality of expertise of refugee status determination currently located in the Refugee Status Appeals Authority be preserved in the context of any appellant structures and procedures …”. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How can the Minister reconcile that answer when the issue of the determination of processes concerns those who have been told they cannot stay here and who then go missing like Bahareh Moradi a person who came here from Iran using all sorts of fictitious passports via her brother who himself smuggled three people into this country all of whom gave false reasons for being here; and it having been determined by the appeals authority and the High Court that her case is not valid why is she still in New Zealand? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Because she absconded and is currently being located with a view to removing her. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Is this the same person whose brother claimed on her behalf that she would be prejudiced by his actions and that he himself was being prejudiced by his beliefs when in fact he is also recorded as visiting Korea 12 times between September 2002 and September 2005 and taking direct flights to Iran on five occasions between September 2003 and September 2005; how does that epitomise a man or family being persecuted? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: It is Ms Moradi whom I assume the member refers to. I preface my comments by saying that as the member would know himself it would be inappropriate to make specific and detailed comments about an individual case. But as we know publicly our procedures are as follows. This case has been to the Refugee Status Board and declined; to the Refugee Status Appeal Authority and declined; to the High Court seeking a judicial review; to the High Court seeking an interim order and declined; and as an appeal to the Associate Minister my colleague which he declined to intervene on. The person absconded and conditions were placed on her by the court. The person absconded and is currently in the process of being located to be removed from the country. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How is she still here—or for that matter how are her brothers still here—given that this family is quoted in the court document as weaving “an elaborate and meticulously crafted web of lies”; and which member of Parliament thought it proper despite this family’s absolutely specious case to petition this Parliament for us to take up her case? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am advised that the family members to whom the member refers were accepted as genuine refugees. I say to the member that all cases—he would know this; he has represented cases himself as have all members of Parliament—are individual often different and dealt with on their merits. As to the second part of the member’s question I say that all members are free to make representations and support migrants to retain their status. As to the point of judgment I say that that has to be a matter for the member. It is always interesting to note that generally there is far more to cases than is often represented to individual members of Parliament. But it remains the judgment of a member of Parliament as to whether they choose to back an individual. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I know all that. I want to know which member of Parliament thought that this case was appropriate to make representations on and even petition to Parliament. It is a very specific question. There are 121 options. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I have no responsibility for actions of individual members of Parliament. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It was Jonathan Coleman. 
Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I know that the member there does not have an electorate and does not have constituents but he will know that it is a convention that when members of Parliament are approached with a petition presented by a constituent they present that petition to Parliament. That would be the duty of a member of Parliament and that is what has taken place. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I think the point is taken.