General comments

Many individual submitters expressed general support for the proposals set out in the discussion paper, with a number commenting on the need to tighten up immigration controls. However, other submitters considered that further work should be undertaken to develop a smaller, more targeted set of amendments to the existing legislation. Some submitters expressed disappointment that the review had focused on problems with the existing legislation rather than taking a more "blue skies" approach.

A number of submitters commented that the real problems are with immigration policy and practice and expressed their interest in being consulted on any reviews of immigration policy and service delivery. As discussed in sections 15.2 and 15.3, many submitters suggested specific changes to immigration policy and its implementation.

Some submitters expressed concern about the timeframe for consultation on the discussion paper. Some submitters commented that not all migrant communities had the opportunity to consider the proposed changes in their own language.

Immigration Commissioner

Some submitters proposed that the new legislation, or a separate piece of legislation, establish an independent Immigration Commissioner akin to the Police Complaints Authority, the Health and Disability Commissioner and other statutory commissioners. Submitters commented that there is a need for a specialist body to oversee the exercise of powers by immigration officers, particularly the existing and proposed powers relating to detention and removal.

The Department of Labour (Immigration New Zealand) is believed to be currently the only government department with sweeping powers of detention whose activities are not subject to oversight by an independent specialist body, in addition to the Ombudsmen. (Refugee and Immigration Committee, Wellington District Law Committee)

There is an argument that an independent Commissioner would be a fair increase in accountability for immigration officers in parallel with the increased accountability of consultants under the immigration advisor's bill currently before Parliament. (Hutt Valley Community Law Centre)

Submitters proposed that such a Commissioner would focus on:

• removal and detention issues
• complaints of misconduct or unfairness against departmental officers and others exercising delegated powers, and
• other urgent issues for which no immediate remedy exists (for example, declined temporary permits).

Submitters proposed that the Commissioner have the power to:

• investigate and require the provision of information, similar to other state sector commissioners
• require that the status quo be maintained in genuine cases while an investigation is underway
• make binding decisions in some limited areas (in relation to preservation of status and conduct)
• make recommendations and require a report back to the Commissioner on those recommendations, and
• refer matters to another statutory body such as the proposed immigration and refugee appeals tribunal or the Human Rights Review Tribunal.

The Commissioner would not have the power to investigate decisions of the Minister, the appeals tribunal(s) or the courts.

One submitter suggested that, in the absence of legal aid, a network of advocates be established to assist basic access to the Commissioner for those with language, cultural or other barriers.

Definition of employment

A number of submitters, including the Office for the Community and Voluntary Sector and Volunteering New Zealand, proposed that volunteering be excluded from the definition of employment in immigration legislation so that organisations with volunteers do not find themselves unexpectedly regarded as employers under the Immigration Act.

The 1987 Act defines "employment" as any activity undertaken for gain or reward. Submitters noted that the Department of Labour advised community organisations in 2003 that overseas volunteers do not require a work permit if the organisation they volunteer for is clearly a charity and the volunteer gains no financial advantage. Submitters commented that in practice, however, the phrase "gain or reward" has been interpreted differently by different immigration officers. Submitters suggested adding volunteers or volunteering to the list of exclusions set out in section 2 of the Act to avoid any further confusion.

Volunteering New Zealand suggested that the exclusion be restricted to activities undertaken for a non-for-profit organisation and that a volunteer be defined as follows:

"A volunteer is an individual who, by free choice, offers his or her time, work and skills, occasionally or on a regular basis, without expectation of compensation, other than reimbursement of reasonable expenses and subsistence allowance necessary for the accomplishment of his or her assignments as a volunteer, for the public benefit, individually or within a framework of informal or officially registered non-government non-profit organisations or national or international public entities." (Volunteering New Zealand)

Responsibility for immigration

Some submitters commented on the government agency that has responsibility for administering immigration legislation. One submitter expressed concern that the Department of Labour's focus on employment and economic development does not always sit comfortably with New Zealand's human rights obligations, including the administration of family and refugee policy. The submitter suggested a separation of functions in order to eliminate competition for processing resources and priority between the two distinct streams.

It is considered that the differences between the drivers for the immigration stream and the drivers of the family reunification/humanitarian/refugee stream are such that the two streams should be administered by different government departments. The immigration stream, which is explicitly aimed at meeting New Zealand's domestic immigration and work-force objectives, should continue to be managed, and prioritised by the Department of Labour. The family, humanitarian and refugee streams should not be required to compete with the migration streams, as they do currently within the Department of Labour. These streams, which are government by human rights, humanitarian considerations and international obligations (and hence a different philosophy), should be managed by a different department, possibly by the Ministry of Justice. (Refugee and Immigration Committee, Wellington District Law Society)

Another submitter, on the other hand, commented that the discussion paper focuses too much on border security and not enough on maximising the benefits of immigration. The submitter suggested that immigration policy might be better located within New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade or the Treasury, or that an independent immigration promotion agency be established in a similar way to NZTE or Tourism New Zealand. One submitter suggested that Immigration New Zealand stand alone, separate from the Department of Labour.

Submissions from Pacific communities

Over 3,500 individuals from New Zealand's Pacific communities signed submissions seeking better access to New Zealand. This included over 2,300 individuals who signed a submission from the Tongan community, who also responded to the issues addressed in the discussion paper. The Tongan community submitted that people from Tonga, Samoa and Fiji be given better opportunities to enter New Zealand than people from other countries and proposed quotas of 3,000 places for Tonga, 4,000 for Samoa and 5,000 for Fiji. The Tongan community also proposed arrangements to regularise the status of those unlawfully in New Zealand who have or are able to find employment here.

Over 1,200 individuals from the Tongan, Samoan, Fijian, and Tuvaluan, Vanuatu and Cook Island communities submitted or signed a common submission that proposed specific visa arrangements for people from the Pacific. The key points of that submission are set out in full:

1. That Pacific people be allowed to travel to NZ and be issued on arrival or prior to departure from country of residence a single visa that allows them to work, visit etc.
2. That every 12 months their visa may be extended for a further 12 months by application to NZIS in NZ
3. That they must hold compulsory medical health insurance for the duration of their stay in NZ
4. That they must obtain a health clearance before leaving county of residence
5. That they must obtain a police clearance before leaving country of residence. [Anyone with a criminal conviction will not be accepted]
6. That they cannot access the NZ social welfare system or unemployment benefit; if they are unemployed they must return home. All Government agencies have access to the immigration status equally
7. That if they commit a criminal offence [to be specified] they will be immediately deported for commitment in their country of origin, and not be able to return to NZ for 10 years subject to a review panel.
8. That their children will have access to education and doctors' visits including themselves, as they will able working and paying taxes.
9. That they will have the same rights as anyone else to apply for NZ residency after two years, providing they meet all the criteria
10. That they will be able to return home and have access to return to NZ without a stand down period.
11. That People aged 50+ will have freedom to travel to and from NZ without restrictions and if able, work, as long as the have medical insurance and sponsorship guarantees by their NZ families to look after them whilst in NZ.

A submission was also made by the Fijian community that proposed similar arrangements for Fijians with skills that are in short supply in New Zealand. This submission also sought an increase in Fiji's Pacific Access Quota from 250 to 750 places, with 375 places reserved for indigenous Fijians.

Other comments on immigration policyImmigration intake

• New Zealand needs a population policy.
• New Zealand should reduce or reconsider immigration levels given climate change, peak fuel and/or pressures on New Zealand's housing market and infrastructure.
• New Zealand should be encouraging skilled expatriates to return home.
• There should not be wide variations in the level of the migrant intake from year-to-year.
• The balance of migrants accepted should be shifted in favour of more skilled migrants.
• New Zealand should only take migrants from similar cultures who are able to fit in to New Zealand lifestyles.

Skilled migration policy

• The Skilled Migrant Category should be reviewed.
• The "comparable labour markets policy" is inappropriate given globalisation of skills, standards and knowledge. Work experience should be recognised from other countries.
• Policy should be simplified for people in professions that New Zealand needs.
• Migrants should be bonded for at least two years to the sort of work they came here for.
• The job offer requirements are hard to meet because the job offer must be valid at the time of expression of interest and again before residence approval - employers are not prepared to wait that long.
• The English requirement should be reduced, set on the basis of the average level of New Zealanders, and/or aligned with Australia's requirement.
• The English requirement should generally be high but appropriate to the person's occupation.
• There should be a policy commitment to better employment outcomes for migrant workers.
• Policy should consider the impact of the "brain drain" on other countries.
• Immigration policy has been Anglicised - there is a need for a stronger focus on Asia.

Business immigration policy

• The English requirement should be removed from the Long-term Business Visa (LTBV) policy.
• The English and age requirements should be removed from the Investor Category.
• Investors should be required to make a more active financial investment.
• The level of investment required is fair but the requirement to transfer the funds to the Government for minimal interest is not.
• LTBV applicants should have a longer period of time to shift to New Zealand.
• Too much detail is required for business plans.

Family policy

• It should be easier for siblings and other family members to get residence in New Zealand.
• Migrants should not be able to bring their sibling here if the sibling is the last family member left in their home country.
• Partnership requirements should be tightened up.
• The requirement for partners to demonstrate correspondence is outdated.
• People applying for residence on partnership grounds should be able to stay here while their application is considered.
• Partners should get a five-year permit initially and then residence if the relationship is still stable after that time.
• The suitability of the New Zealand partner should be assessed before a person obtains a visa on partnership grounds.

Work policy

• Work permit policy is not meeting the needs of employers.
• More Pacific Access Category visas should be issued to help address labour shortages.
• Shortages of seasonal workers should be declared early in the year.
• Seasonal workers should be able to obtain a visa from offshore and return every year.
• Seasonal workers should be able to move between employers.
• Skilled workers should be able to obtain residence; others should get a work permit.
• The occupational skills list is inflexible.
• There is scope for improving the working holiday scheme by allowing visa holders to undertake more study and to work for the same employer for more than three months.
• There is a shortage of truck drivers that needs to be addressed.
• Foreign fishing crew should be subject to streamlined procedures given they spend most of their time at sea and have limited impact on the New Zealand population.

Student policy

• New Zealand should facilitate residence for those who are studying here.
• The limit on the number of hours that may be worked should be removed to enable international students to undertake vocational courses and work-based training.
• The requirement for medical insurance should be extended to graduating students transferring to a six-month visa.
• Both parents should be able to obtain a Guardian Visa.

Visitor policy

• People should be able to get a visa to enable them to look for a job.
• Discriminatory rules are being applied to visitor visa applicants from some countries - the same rules should apply to everyone.
• Applicants should not need to produce evidence of a return ticket until the application is approved in principle.

Returning resident's visa (RRV) policy

• People who marry a New Zealand citizen should be entitled to a RRV issued for an indefinite period.
• There should be flexibility for people working on overseas contracts.
• The principal applicant should not need to apply for a RRV in order for a family member to obtain a RRV.

Refugee and humanitarian policies

• Refugee status applications need to be thoroughly scrutinised.
• There is a need for a common-sense approach to humanitarian issues.
• Family reunification policies and processes are not working for refugees.
• Too many additional family members of refugees are being allowed to come to New Zealand.

Other

• Once the framework is set, it should be simple, transparent and stable so as not to undermine migrant confidence.
• Immigration policy needs to be linked to wider skills and economic development.
• Consideration needs to be given to the role of immigration policy in sustaining New Zealand's international education profile.
• People from the Pacific Islands should have better access to New Zealand (see below).
• Immigration health policy should not take a narrow view of disability.
• The Domestic Violence Policy should be reviewed.
• Buddhist monks who have demonstrated that they are good "citizens" should be allowed to stay here as long as they have the support of the community.
• Residents should get a four-year probationary visa.
• The status of overstayers should be legalised if they have been here a long time and are contributing to the community.
• New Zealand should test prospective migrants' acceptance of New Zealand values.