Immigration Bill: First Reading; Thursday 16 August 2007 Tariana Turia, Co-leader, Maori Party

Tena koe Madam Speaker. Tena tatou katoa.

Sometimes when we come into the House and we hear people talking about these issues, we wonder how much those people understand the history of this country and the history of immigration.

When we hear talk about “fitting in to the culture” and “values of this country”, we feel as tangata whenua, that that is something we would have loved to see happen but did not experience.

This legislation is clearly targeted at people of colour, people who do not come from Western-speaking countries and I think that is appalling.

Immigration (New Zealand) has produced a pamphlet for migrants which features a statement that I believe provides an apt context for both migrants coming to Aotearoa; and for Members coming to this Immigration Bill.

The comment, from Hon Justice Taihakurei Edward Durie, is as follows:

The Treaty of Waitangi is not just a Bill of rights for Maori. It is a Bill of Rights for Pakeha too. It is the Treaty that gives Pakeha the right to be here.

And maybe sometimes we need to be reminded of that.

The challenge issued by Justice Durie is to remind us all that without the Treaty there would be no lawful authority for Pakeha presence in this part of the world. He describes Pakeha as Tangata Tiriti, those who belong to the land by right of the Treaty. And I agree with him.

This is a most suitable challenge from which to consider the Bill’s purpose - which is to manage immigration, through balancing the rights of the individual and the national interest as determined by the Crown.

This is an interesting twist of the truth– that the national interest is determined by the Crown.

Because of course, Te Tiriti o Waitangi, as the first immigration document of this nation, puts forward another vision: that the “national interest” is determined in dialogue and co-operation between the Treaty Partners.

And despite the words of Justice Durie on their promotional material; despite the status attributed on Immigration New Zealand’s website to the Treaty as the founding document of our nation, there appears to have been no specific Maori input into the Immigration Act Review which led to this Bill.

Such apparent neglect clearly means that no amount of public relations air-brushing can hide the fact that Government does not see that a Treaty obligation exists in relation to immigration. The Maori Party contends, that until they do, no immigration policy can have any legitimacy.

We believe, that as the Treaty partner, Mâori should be consulted on every aspect concerning migrants who wish to reside here. The aims of the Bill are broad-sweeping, clarifying details around the very nature of residence and citizenship policies. We are told the proposals will enhance the security of New Zealand; facilitate the settlement of migrants, refugees and protected persons; and support New Zealand’s Immigration related international obligations. In short, the Tangata Tiriti – those who come to this land by virtue of the Treaty – will be well protected. And for some individual tangata whenua – those who perhaps work in the immigration system, or those tangata whenua who may have relationships which will be supported through the improvements to residence decisions - there may be some benefit that results from the changes.

But for Maori as a partner to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, there is absolutely nothing.

There is nothing in this Bill which reflects a partnership approach in which tangata whenua, in a spirit of manaakitanga and in a demonstation of rangatiratanga, can develop systems for whanau, hapu and iwi to help immigrants and refugees in their adjustment to Aotearoa.

There is nothing in this Bill which serves to provide incentives for whanau, hapu and iwi to produce economic, social, cultural and environmental benefits out of pooling their skills, knowledge, talents and experience with those of new New Zealanders.

There is nothing in this Bill to support whanau, hapu and iwi and new migrant groups to develop collective strategies for moving forward together as communities and ultimately as a nation.

It is not as if the concept of a Treaty partnership is automatically alien or unwelcome to new migrants.

Two weeks ago I received an email from one of these new New Zealanders, living in Dunedin who told me, and I quote:

“I do very much agree that newcomers to New Zealand need to be introduced – in a friendly way – to the Treaty and Maori culture. Also the idea of a welcome from tangata whenua is a nice concept indeed, and I wish this were in place when my family first moved here in 2003…..Maori inclusion in immigration planning is important.

So one has to ask – if this man, having lived in Aotearoa for four years, can see value in Maori inclusion in immigration planning – what is stopping other Tangata Tiriti – many of whom descend from new settlers who have been living here for some 167 years, from also being able to support Maori having a partnership role?

So what then, does this Bill do?

Well far from the friendly welcome, this Bill seems just another opportunity to enforce the snooping power and control regime that has dominated justice legislation.

The extensions of state power will now include greater powers of search, entry and detention. Immigration officials will be able to detain people without warrant, for up to four hours, and without a warrant of commitment, for up to 96 hours.

Juxtaposed against the new powers for immigration officers to enter, inspect and search premises for suspected ‘persons of interest’, we are pleased that it appears the ‘accused’ will not automatically be confined to a jail sentence upon suspicion.

The performance of the New Zealand Government alerts us to what the purpose of this Bill is really about –it is to build a case for upping the ante in the fight against terrorism.

A significant context of the Bill, given its provisions, is the assumed ‘security threat’ raised in other very recent Bills and reports, such as the Terrorist Suppression Amendment Bill, the Aviation Security Legislation Bill; or the Law Commission’s Search and Surveillance Powers report.

This Immigration Bill creates a whole new artillery of secret information and special advocates. The Bill also allows classified information to be used, with special safeguards. It sets up the case by which the Bill will enable the future collection and use of biometric information for identity verification purposes such as fingerprints, iris scans, and photographs.

It proposes to disband the four independent appellate bodies that are currently existing – and collapse them into one.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to talk about this whole fascination with information, classified or otherwise.

In a previous life, as Associate Minister of Maori Affairs, I was approached by the former Immigration Minister, Lianne Dalziel, who I believe had a genuine interest in understanding and valuing the context that Te Tiriti o Waitangi established for immigration.

And we called together a consultation hui in February 2001, at which from memory, participants included Professor Ranginui Walker, Pauline Tangiora, Atareta Poananga, Amster Reedy, Sir Paul Reeves, Eru Potaka-Dewes, Annette Sykes, the Hon Tuariki Delamere, Moana Jackson, Jason Fox and many other expert advisors across te Ao Maori. As I recall also, a very useful report was written - a report that never saw the light of day.

And for the life of me, I can’t work out what was so confidential, why the information in their report warranted such a classified security rating that the nation should be spared its ideas and recommendations.

The Immigration Bill sets in place a new set of minimum standards and protocols relating to international protection, deportation, appeals, compliance and enforcement, monitoring and detention.

But there is one standard, above all standards, which this Bill fails to honour – and that standard is set by Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

The Maori Party will not support this Bill.

ENDS

© Scoop Media