4. PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) Link to this
to the Minister of Immigration
Does he believe someone who the Refugee Status Appeals Authority states “has a history of giving false evidence about numerous matters concerning his claimed Christian activities including the alleged consequences of those activities.” and “has produced fabricated documents in both his first and his second refugee claim, including self-serving fraudulent letters.” is the kind of person New Zealand should consider granting refugee status to?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Immigration) Link to this
I believe that Immigration New Zealand and the relevant appellate bodies—
Madam SPEAKER
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The debate back here is taking place because someone behind me made a rather serious allegation. All I said was: “Look, I never crooked some old Japanese lady.”
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I believe that Immigration New Zealand and the relevant appellate bodies, which have all of the relevant information before them, are the best places to decide whether a person meets the requirements for the grant of refugee status, rather than the court of public opinion. Of course, I have refrained from referring to specific appellate bodies or tribunals by name in relation to a specific case.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would just like to indicate that my next question will be slightly longer than I would normally ask, but it does contain—
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Does the Minister believe that someone who, during his initial refugee claim and first appeal, maintained that he was baptised in New Zealand, not in Korea, then subsequently claimed to have been baptised in Korea before he moved to New Zealand, and even produced what was judged to be a false Korean baptism certificate to support his claim—a move that led the Refugee Status Appeals Authority to note the appellant’s “willingness and propensity to produce false documents to bolster his claims and then to modify his evidence wherever necessary to patch up any inconsistencies in those false documents”—is the kind of person New Zealand should allow to remain here?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I am prevented by the relevant sections of the Immigration Act from commenting on this matter in any detail. I judge that it would also be inappropriate for me to prejudge a matter that may come before me at some future date.
Keith LockeWhy does New Zealand not follow the example of Australia and some other countries in not deporting Christian converts from Islam back to Iran, because of the dangers of persecution there, particularly since President Ahmadinejad came to power?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
It is not appropriate for me to comment on the policies of other countries. I would note, however, that no advisory has been received from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in respect of that country. I can further confirm that the New Zealand Government is continuing to negotiate with the Iranian Government on seeking a resolution to travel document issues for Iranian nationals.
Does the Minister believe that a person whose “attendance at church, his conversion of an Iranian woman and his attempts to convert remand refugees were all activities calculated for the sole purpose of advancing his refugee claim”, as stated by the Refugee Status Appeals Authority, which rejected his claim that he made a genuine conversion to Christianity, is the kind of person New Zealand should allow to stay here?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I repeat that I am prevented by the relevant sections of the Immigration Act from commenting on this matter in any detail.
Is not the Minister’s approach of trying to deport Iranian Christian converts to third countries both unrealistic, in that it would be hard to find a country that would grant them permanent residence, and also saying that New Zealand is heartless or less compassionate than other countries in this respect?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
In respect of the first part of the question, I am advised that there are indeed real possibilities for third-country removal for people in the same type of situation as this particular case. In respect of the second part of the question, I do not believe that the New Zealand Government has acted heartlessly in this matter—quite the reverse.
Can the Minister confirm that the appellant in refugee appeals 74256 and 75889, from which the quotes in my preceding questions were drawn, is an Iranian who has recently ended what his supporters, such as Keith Locke, have called a hunger strike, but what his lawyer now claims was “a fast, and not done to try to blackmail the Government”, and what was ultimately probably nothing more than a farce, and can the Minister confirm who this man is?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE Link to this
I am prevented by the relevant sections of the Immigration Act from commenting on this matter in any detail.
I seek leave to table an article headed “Germany halts deportation of Iranian Christian” from BosNewsLife News Center.
I seek leave to table an article from People’s Daily Online headed “Netherlands suspends deportation of homosexual …”—
I seek leave to table a press statement from Peter Brown on 17 August headed: “Setting the Record Straight”.
I seek leave to table a second statement by Peter Brown, 90 minutes later on the same day, with the same heading but half the size because—
I seek leave to table the transcript of a Scoop interview with Peter Brown where he tries to explain—
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I seek leave to table a document setting out how we followed Australia with respect to the Tampa refugees—they took none and we took all of them.