Dr Frank Deliu rightly argued in the Herald that migrants face significant risks when attempting to interact with the New Zealand immigration system.
It is as complex as he says and it is also correct that 30 per cent of applicants fail in their efforts, including those assisted by lawyers or agents.
But in suggesting lawyers offer the only safe route and that the new Immigration Adviser Licensing regime will be ineffective, I think he shows an imperfect grasp of history and a biased perspective of the future.
Lawyers, despite the self-regulation of the legal profession, have been major offenders against migrants when it comes to standards of fairness.
Under the Immigration Licensing regime about to come into effect in May, licensed immigration advisers will have demonstrated good character and have a proven track record. They will also have shown competence in the administration of immigration cases.
One of the weaknesses of the new regime is that any lawyer can practice immigration work, whether skilled or experienced or not. Historical evidence shows that many lawyers with no experience work in this area and will no doubt continue to do so.
Licensed advisers will face scrutiny from an independent authority, be subject to search without warrant and face independently administered penalties including suspension or cancellation of licence.
They will face fines of up to $10,000 as well as repayment of fees and compensation to the applicant.
In contrast, Law Society penalties against its own have historically amounted to nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
Dr Deliu also sees danger in the fact that less than 100 advisers seem likely to be licensed at the commencement of the regime. Surely that shows only the best have been able to meet the rigorous demands of obtaining a licence.
That's a fact that should give the public a high degree of confidence in licensed immigration advisers -
they can be 100 per cent certain that a licensed immigration adviser has demonstrated his or her competence to an independent and rigorous authority.
However, the public may have no such confidence in lawyers, some of whom may have zero expertise in immigration work.
As for all those former agents and consultants who have not fronted up to the new regime, it is right to suggest they may still operate under the radar, wreaking havoc on their victims. We can't stop scumbags from "passing themselves off" as licensed advisers any more than we can stop them from "passing themselves off" as lawyers.
All the law can do is provide migrants with a reasonable means of protecting themselves from exploitation and a rigorous ability for pursuing and punishing offenders. For migrants, the Immigration Advisers Licensing regime achieves both of these objectives - rather more completely than Law Society rules.
There is another twist to Dr Deliu's suggestion that lawyers will be "safer hands".
The Law Society is trying to talk the minister into agreeing that persons who are neither lawyers nor licensed immigration advisers should be allowed to give immigration advice if working for a lawyer. If they get away with that, offending individuals would not be under the disciplinary authority of the Law Society or the licensing authority.
For the record, I am neither a lawyer, nor a licensed immigration adviser but my company works extensively with both.
They are fine, committed individuals who dedicate themselves to their migrant clients' interests. Their quality comes from within, not simply as a result of their qualifications, however impressive those may be.
Perhaps the real message to migrants is there are plenty of qualified people able to help you - lawyers and licensed advisers - and you should make sure you deal with qualified people.
But for the best service, use your judgment to pick a qualified professional who cares.
Whether licensed adviser or a lawyer, qualification on its own does not guarantee compassion, commitment or value for money.
* Aussie G. Malcolm is a former Minister of Immigration and a director of Malcolm Pacific Limited, Migration Experts.
<i>Aussie Malcolm:</i> Law degree doesn't equate to expertise for migrants
Opinion
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.