4. GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) Link to this
to the Minister of Immigration
Does he stand by his statement to the House yesterday that “there have been no substantiated cases of corruption in the Immigration Service since 2002-03”?
Hon SHANE JONESIs he then saying that the Auditor-General got it wrong when he found cases of fraud identified in 2005-06 and reported to this House in 2006?
Could the Minister explain how he expects New Zealanders to believe anything he says if a Minister is prepared to stand in the House on one day and in a very pious fashion say there were no cases of fraud other than those in 2002-03, but a Minister then comes in the next day and says that the following year the Auditor-General found cases, which he mentioned in his report, and he was right; perhaps he would also like to explain why the then Minister, the Hon David Cunliffe, a man widely believed to be running the show, signed out over two dozen letters outlining fraud in 2007?
Would the Minister like to take the time to explain to the House what he sees as being the difference between fraud and corruption?
I would invite the member to consult the dictionary over there. There are no substantiated examples of corruption. The department, with its internal robust processes, has uncovered wrongdoing, and there do exist small matters of fraud.
Does the Minister stand by the statement that the Minister of Immigration, David Cunliffe, did not know of serious misconduct and corruption within the Pacific division, even though the Residence Review Board publicly released multiple reports in June and September last year saying the Pacific division was repeatedly breaching the principles of natural justice, administrative fairness, and so on; if so, if the Minister was aware of all this evidence—or was not aware of all that evidence—what was he doing during his period as Minister, or was he simply doing nothing and, far from running the show, just ignoring the show?
I repeat, one, there are no substantiated examples of corruption and, two, there is an internal robust investigation process located in the corporate division of the Department of Labour; and if the member has any other concerns, I would alert him to the fact that the Pacific division is going through a review.
Does the Minister feel a little bit set up in having to put the incredible proposition that Ministers of Immigration were unaware of the problems within the Pacific division of the Immigration Service after the Auditor-General had explicitly highlighted the problem, the Residence Review Board had publicly released details of widespread, repeated wrongdoing, his own chief executive had launched an independent inquiry into illegal decision-making involving the head of the Immigration Service, and Ministers had signed off over 40 written questions detailing the size of the problem, and all of that in less than 1 year; so why should New Zealanders believe him any more than they believe the other two Ministers in this case?
A welter of claims have been made there by Mr Brownlee. There are four reviews or investigations—tahi, rua, toru, whā. That ought to be enough for Mr Brownlee and the rest of New Zealand.
Hon Dover SamuelsNo, the poor fellow is the fall guy sent out there. It is surprising to us that Michael Cullen did not answer the question today, but I think we know why. Is not the Government spin on these immigration scandals just that, with Ministers claiming they cannot be involved, they cannot know, and they cannot ask questions because all these were simply employment matters—yet yesterday we had the Prime Minister, the Minister of Housing, and the Minister of State Services all piling into the Housing New Zealand Corporation and even suggesting that the chief executive should have her pay docked?
For the benefit of the House, I say that one, in the year 2007, in April, independent investigators were called in and they concluded that the processes in the Department of Labour to uncover wrongdoing were at the upper end of good practice in the State sector; two, there are a wide range of claims, and no doubt they will all be exhaustively looked into in the many reviews under way.