Stronger visa law powers to government

[deverett]

To be blunt, I imagine the NZ government is more concerned about saving lives - including, potentially, yours - than being "fair" for 12 months. To put this answer in perspective, here in the UK, because my partner and I have underlying health issues that would mean complications and big use of medical resources if we were infected, we aren't allowed beyond our own property line - I haven't been anywhere since the beginning of March - and this "house arrest" is likely to continue till a reliable treatment and vaccine are discovered.

It's a harsh truth but hearing cases like yours and then what my family is also seeing back in the UK I'd rather New Zealand have powers to stop it deteriorating to that level. They have done a fantastic job getting out ahead of this thing and it would be a shame to lose that. I can't imagine revoking entry permissions will be something they will do without very good reasons, I would think it would likely be in line with the current notice of removing it temporarily on first time entrants and not re-entry. Those returning will more likely have purpose for returning such as going to work out their family, whereas first time entrants will more likely be coming over with no purpose so why should New Zealand take the risk on letting them come in if they have no need to be here. This would explain why they are suggesting private jets as I would imagine investor visa residents would be this sort of category to have been granted residency and not coming on shore with it.

[LemonAndPaeroa]

I think the measures should be safe but also fair. I’ve heard many stories from migrants who had a valid work visa, a job waiting for them, had given up their house and job overseas, and were suddenly unable to come here. I get that people need to be quarantined - which protects people from incoming passengers already - and that there is limited capacity so it needs to be managed, but at least give people some perspective and options, even if it is paying for the two weeks quarantine.

[EGoodhue]

Anyone interested to watch the Select Committee session about the Immigration (Covid-19 Response) Amendment Bill today between 3pm and 6pm can watch it on the NZ Parliament Facebook livestream: https://www.facebook.com/NZParliament/

[mara_visa]

I think the measures should be safe but also fair. I’ve heard many stories from migrants who had a valid work visa, a job waiting for them, had given up their house and job overseas, and were suddenly unable to come here. I get that people need to be quarantined - which protects people from incoming passengers already - and that there is limited capacity so it needs to be managed, but at least give people some perspective and options, even if it is paying for the two weeks quarantine.

It's more than fairness, it's also about the rule of law. Blanket laws like this are a potential threat to democracy... I know it is often assumed that the extraordinary laws - including these immigration changes - will be applied only when absolutely needed, and with good intentions (e.g. to extend working visas rather than the opposite). If that is the case, this should be specified in the law, instead of giving govt blanket powers. We have seen how blanket rules like this can be applied (see even this weeks news about a family refused to visit a dying relative - the court overruled this). Maybe seeing how democracy is chipped away in my own country during this pandemic makes me more aware of these dangers. More specific law would make it better for all, not only migrants but also NZers.

[EGoodhue]

If you have concerns that this Bill poses a threat to democracy or is going to be implemented unfairly, I really encourage you to watch the recording of the Select Committee session and the submissions made by industry stakeholders. The Bill is being debated very comprehensively and stakeholders are raising some very critical issues, offering some solutions to the flaws in the Bill and the potential issues. The process of a Bill becoming law in NZ is very robust and while not every individual migrant's point of view is going to be considered in this process, please have a look at the submissions that are being made by industry stakeholders and this will assure you that the Government is going to be held to account when this Bill becomes law. Please don't base your opinions solely on what you read in the media - there are large chunks of detail missing from what is reported in the news. There are several useful resources available for you to do your own research about this Bill and the process it's yet to go through before it's enacted - a good start is https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-a...laws-are-made/ and https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/s...nse-committee/.

[mara_visa]

If you have concerns that this Bill poses a threat to democracy or is going to be implemented unfairly, I really encourage you to watch the recording of the Select Committee session and the submissions made by industry stakeholders. The Bill is being debated very comprehensively and stakeholders are raising some very critical issues, offering some solutions to the flaws in the Bill and the potential issues. The process of a Bill becoming law in NZ is very robust and while not every individual migrant's point of view is going to be considered in this process, please have a look at the submissions that are being made by industry stakeholders and this will assure you that the Government is going to be held to account when this Bill becomes law. Please don't base your opinions solely on what you read in the media - there are large chunks of detail missing from what is reported in the news. There are several useful resources available for you to do your own research about this Bill and the process it's yet to go through before it's enacted - a good start is https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-a...laws-are-made/ and https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/s...nse-committee/.

Thank you for the links. Glad to hear the bill is being scrutinised, I hope this will result in a piece of legislation that clearly defines powers of the state. I agree lawmaking processes are generally good in NZ (although laws are now passed under urgency, which limits public input that normally takes place via submissions). Good to read there are stakeholders who scrutinise the bill in these circumstances.

[LemonAndPaeroa]

Yes I second that as I had the same worries, also with regards to the quick changes that have been made in crisis situations by this government. It was good to read Lane Neave’s article re the bill a few days back.

[EGoodhue]

The Epidemic Response Committee has released its final report on the Immigration (Covid-19 Response) Amendment Bill - you can read it here: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/bill...75/tab/reports. The report includes the Supplementary Order Paper, which are the amendments that the committee recommends being made to the Bill before it is passed into law.

Several submissions were made about recommended changes by immigration industry stakeholders, and the main themes of the submissions were about:
1. wanting more assurance that migrant's rights are going to be protected and not taken away;
2. ensuring the powers that are to be given to the Minister are not to be used to materially disadvantage migrants in any way;
3. ensuring that the powers only be used where necessary to respond to the effects of Covid-19 (that is, this is not the way Immigration will operate forever and is being put in place only to respond to the Covid-19 crisis temporarily);
4. seeing that suspending the ability to lodge applications or EOI's applies only to people outside NZ while the border closure is in place, and no one inside NZ will be prevented from submitting applications or EOI's.

Submitters spoke strongly of making sure that migrants are not disadvantaged by these changes, and it seems the committee took this on board and the theme is covered in the Supplementary Order Paper. This is in contrast to the repugnant comments made by Winston Peters today, where he suggested that unemployed migrant workers "go home". I can not believe that such a xenophobic, small-minded relic is our Deputy Prime Minister

[ecilassim]

The Epidemic Response Committee has released its final report on the Immigration (Covid-19 Response) Amendment Bill - you can read it here: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/bill...75/tab/reports. The report includes the Supplementary Order Paper, which are the amendments that the committee recommends being made to the Bill before it is passed into law.

Several submissions were made about recommended changes by immigration industry stakeholders, and the main themes of the submissions were about:
1. wanting more assurance that migrant's rights are going to be protected and not taken away;
2. ensuring the powers that are to be given to the Minister are not to be used to materially disadvantage migrants in any way;
3. ensuring that the powers only be used where necessary to respond to the effects of Covid-19 (that is, this is not the way Immigration will operate forever and is being put in place only to respond to the Covid-19 crisis temporarily);
4. seeing that suspending the ability to lodge applications or EOI's applies only to people outside NZ while the border closure is in place, and no one inside NZ will be prevented from submitting applications or EOI's.

Submitters spoke strongly of making sure that migrants are not disadvantaged by these changes, and it seems the committee took this on board and the theme is covered in the Supplementary Order Paper. This is in contrast to the repugnant comments made by Winston Peters today, where he suggested that unemployed migrant workers "go home". I can not believe that such a xenophobic, small-minded relic is our Deputy Prime Minister

what legal authority of this committee have in this bill? I mean these point are the committee recommended, but how does it effect this bill become laws?

[Kelerei]

what legal authority of this committee have in this bill? I mean these point are the committee recommended, but how does it effect this bill become laws?

The short answer is "rather significant", and for the more detailed answer, have a read here:
https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-a...l-becomes-law/

We're between the "Select committee" and "Second reading" stages.