Blue Jackie: Immigration Bill — In Committee 
Blue Jackie: Immigration Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6747] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I am very pleased to take part in the debate on Part 5. I was not a member of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in the last parliamentary term. I think this part might be a little bit contentious. But first of all I will give some background to Part 5 and talk about the types of refugees that New Zealand does accept. 
The most common route is through the United Nations quota system. New Zealand accepts 750 refugees each year. These refugees are vetted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and on their arrival they spend several weeks at Mangere where they are orientated and have further checks. As refugees accepted through the quota system those people are automatically given permanent residence. 
As a signatory to the 1951 United Nations convention and the 1967 protocol on the status of refugees New Zealand is obliged to consider all claims for refugee status or political asylum. The second group of refugees are asylum or convention refugees who claim refugee status after they arrive in New Zealand at the border or when their temporary permit expires. There are an estimated 300 asylum seekers per year and of those who go through the review or appeal process approximately 50 percent would be accepted. Many of these people arrive at our borders having destroyed all documentation so proving who they are and the situation in the place where they have come from can be very difficult and time consuming. However while they are making a claim for refugee status and are waiting to be verified they are able to use the public health service their children go to school and they are entitled to benefits. 
In New Zealand all claims are considered by the refugee status branch of the New Zealand Immigration Service. If a claim is unsuccessful there is an appeal process. People can lodge an appeal against the New Zealand Immigration Service decision to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority or RSAA which is an independent body. In fact there are four review bodies: the Refugee Status Appeals Authority the Removal Review Authority the Residence Review Board and the Deportation Review Tribunal. It is important to note that all four appeal processes will be put into one body called the Immigration and Protection Tribunal thus making it a much simpler process for all. 
While refugees wait to be verified they can generally get a work permit while their claim is being determined. Asylum or convention refugees might be in New Zealand for 2 or 3 years before their status can be determined so it is quite a long process for many of them. Of course they have to prove that if they go back to their country of origin they could be persecuted tortured or under imminent threat of death. 
The third route is the family unification category which I will not go into. 
It is important to note that Part 5 does not affect our refugee quota programme at all—it is not about changing that—and that the bill upholds our international refugee and protection obligations. But a new framework is being created for refugee and protection decisions. It incorporates all the conventions and protocols that we subscribe to. In relation to the changes in this part that could be contentious it is important to note that often over the last few years we have had examples where asylum seekers have come to New Zealand are going through very much a good-faith process with the Immigration Service to prove their claims but start using the media to put out information whether or not it is correct. In that way it becomes a bad-faith process. They are able to say that because they are in the media now they cannot go back to their country of origin as the authorities there know that they are here and they will be persecuted if they go back. That approach is not acting in good faith. To give the Immigration Service some balance the bill now provides for an implied waiver of confidentiality in refugee and protection decisions where a refugee protected person or a claimant puts information about his or her case in the public realm. It provides the Crown’s perspective on an individual’s case. If individuals choose to go to the media the Crown should have the right of reply in that instance. None of this will be done lightly. It is important to stress that the process is a good-faith process and if individuals choose not to follow that good-faith process they will suffer the consequences. 
Another change on Supplementary Order Paper 32 provides that refugee and protection decisions can be released where it is in the public interest and it is safe to do so. Again this has not been done lightly at all. It would be a last resort.