6. Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) Link to this
to the Minister of Immigration
What involvement, if any, did the Minister have in respect of the case of Mr Sunan Siriwan either before or after the issuing of the special direction for a work visa to be granted as an exception to policy?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) Link to this
I have had no involvement with this case other than discussing it in preparation to answer parliamentary questions.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
What action did the Minister of Immigration take to review the special direction for a work visa for Mr Siriwan when he received a letter from a Mr Keith Williams dated 3 August 2005 alleging: “If Sunan Siriwan went to Samoa for 3 months to tile Mr Field’s house, he would be given a work permit after 3 months by the New Zealand Immigration Service.”?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I am advised there is no record that the then Minister of Immigration received that letter until an attachment to an email on 7 September 2005. He replied to the letter on 14 September 2005 and his office forwarded it to the relevant Minister, the Associate Minister of Immigration, on—[ Interruption] Madam Speaker, either members opposite want to hear the answer or they do not.
Madam SPEAKERHon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I am quite happy not to give it, but if they ask the question, perhaps they may want to listen.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
What specific actions did the Minister of Immigration take to review the special direction to cancel the removal order for Ms Phanngarm when he received a letter from Mr Williams dated 3 August 2005 alleging that: “If Sunan Siriwan went to Samoa for 3 months to tile Mr Field’s house, he would … be allowed to return to New Zealand. Following this outcome, his wife and child would return to New Zealand from Thailand.”?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I repeat that the advice I have received is that the Minister received that letter on 7 September 2005, and I have no advice to hand on what action may have been taken with regard to Ms Phanngarm. I would be happy to come back to the member on that point.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
What specific action did the then Minister of Immigration, Paul Swain, take to review the special direction for work visas for both Mr Siriwan and Ms Phanngarm when he was advised by Mr Williams in a letter dated 3 August 2005 that he, Mr Williams, knew of these arrangements by Mr Field, because Mr Field had sent Mr Williams to Samoa to accompany Mr Siriwan and to do the waterproofing on Mr Field’s house in Samoa?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
To cut a long story short, I would say that Mr Ingram found that Mr Williams’ claims were without credibility.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
Did the Minister of Immigration discuss with Taito Phillip Field the allegations contained in the letter he received from Mr Williams, dated 3 August 2005, when that letter clearly outlined a possible conflict of interest in the actions of Taito Phillip Field during his ongoing representations to the Associate Minister on behalf of Mr Siriwan and his wife Ms Phanngarm; if not, why not?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
As I have described, the then Minister received the letter from Mr Williams on 7 September. He took the appropriate action, which was on 12 September to forward to the Associate Minister, who was the Minister acting on the case, a copy of that letter. He acknowledged to Mr Williams on 14 September that his mail had been received.
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith Link to this
Is the reason the Minister of Immigration, the Hon Paul Swain, took no specific actions following his receipt of the letter from Mr Williams, dated 3 August 2005, that Mr Swain was fully aware of the involvement of Mr Siriwan in the work for Mr Field at his house in Samoa, because the Minister had met Mr Siriwan at Mr Field’s house on or about 18 March 2005, in Samoa?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
While Mr Swain has freely admitted that he may have met Mr Siriwan on a chance visit to Mr Field’s house, it is very clear from the Ingram inquiry and subsequent press reporting that Mr Swain played no part in the decision to grant Mr Siriwan’s discretion.