The House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security studied the removal of foreign national offenders, hearing from Steve Watson, General Manager of Immigration Compliance and Investigations for New Zealand's Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.
Steve Watson explained that New Zealand prioritizes the removal of foreign national offenders who are liable for deportation, using a graduated compliance model where responses are proportionate to harm and risk. He noted that most deportations are based on criminal liability and bad character, and that New Zealand makes every effort to deport directly from prison or immediately after court hearings, with a 96-hour detention power to arrange travel. Watson recommended a case management approach for lower-priority cases, including encouraging voluntary departures through regular contact and disincentives like preventing illegal work, and noted that New Zealand does not name individuals on public wanted lists due to privacy concerns and the risk of driving them underground. He disagreed with any suggestion that Five Eyes partners are uncooperative, stating New Zealand has no issues with them, though it sometimes faces delays with other countries like Vietnam in obtaining travel documents.
Watson described New Zealand's information-sharing processes with police, corrections, and other agencies through approved information-sharing agreements under the Privacy Act, which allow proactive data sharing without lengthy judicial permits, enabling same-day responses in serious cases. He highlighted that New Zealand uses facial recognition at the border but not CCTV for locating unlawful migrants, relying instead on investigative techniques, informants, and diaspora community cooperation. He noted that New Zealand maintains an annual estimate of unlawfully present people (about 21,000) and a detailed database of criminal offenders, and that any temporary migrant sentenced to imprisonment is liable for deportation, with discretion only for very minor offences. Watson explained that when deportation is impossible due to international treaties, New Zealand manages individuals in the community through residence and reporting agreements rather than indefinite detention, citing human rights considerations.
Watson stated that the state bears removal costs when individuals cannot pay, but recovery of those costs is under 10% because the person is offshore. He noted that New Zealand's minister rarely intervenes in deportation cases and that the humanitarian appeal test requiring exceptional circumstances is seldom successful, with family ties alone not being sufficient to avoid deportation. Watson also described New Zealand's accredited employer schemes and migrant exploitation protection visas, which allow exploited workers to escape exploitative situations and obtain open work visas, while employers face prosecution and stand-down lists. He acknowledged that New Zealand's system prioritizes criminal offending over non-criminal overstayers due to public expectation, and that the country is agile in sharing information within the Five Eyes network, including on terrorism-related matters.
The committee did not engage in procedural debate, motions, or votes during this meeting.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.