by Iain Macleod
1. May 2009 21:58
From May 4 all those consultants normally based in New Zealand who provide advice on immigration to New Zealand (unless they are exempt) must have a license. This legislation was passed after years of work by the Government who had decreed that 'vulnerable' migrants needed protection from the incompetent and the unethical.
I have never been convinced any case for licensing existed and I still don't. But that is history. This sort of regulation is an ideological legacy of the last New Zealand Government that the current one went along with and now they are in power have little appetite to do anything about it. It was always my view that if I am forced to be regulated by the Government because my advice has real consequences then immigration officers should also be held to the same standard. After all if you are a migrant making life changing decisions far more rely on the Immigration Department than any professional adviser.
This view was, not unexpectedly, rejected. Recently we had a case of an New Zealand immigration officer not only demonstrating a clear ignorance of policy but openly suggesting that we file an application for a client which would effectively involve a false declaration. The officer would I am sure have seen herself as being helpful. I find it disturbing in the extreme that there is a rule book but immigration officers feel able to implement policy not found in it yet if I as a professional licensed New Zealand Immigration Adviser was to give that sort of advice I could end up spending seven years in jail.
The client is pregnant and in New Zealand on a visitor permit. Policy recently changed such that pregnant applicants cannot get ‘extensions’ to existing temporary (visitor) permits except in highly limited circumstances which our client does not meet. Although we advised the client not to come here till the baby was born she decided to regardless. The client's permit is about to expire and we discussed with a senior officer if we could file an extension application as an exception to policy. Without giving any assurances that officer said we should.
I spoke with another officer in the same branch who not only told me that pregnant women are eligible for extensions to temporary permits but when I told her (politely) that she was incorrect she said that I should file the application anyway without the medical that policy requires (because then Immigration New Zealand would not know she was pregnant). I couldn't quite believe my ears. Here I am, a licensed New Zealand immigration adviser held to an incredibly high standard of competence and ethics being told by an immigration officer that I should consider filing an application knowing it to contain false information! I told the officer that I would not be able to contemplate that as I am licensed.
When Governments embrace the sort of rigid regulation that we as professional advisers have to now work under it is a bit rich being advised by immigration officers who clearly don't know their own rules to file applications knowing it to contain false information.
To my mind all New Zealand immigration officers should be held to the same standard of immigration policy knowledge and ethics that we in the private sector are.
.jpg)
Subscribe