Green MP Golriz Ghahraman, left, and National MP Gerry Brownlee both opposed the mass arrivals bill by Immigration Minister Andrew Little, centre, that proposes to extend the period of time asylum seekers can be detained without a warrant. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone / Angus Dreaver
A political spat has broken out over the government's proposal to extend the period of time asylum seekers can be detained without a warrant.
National and the Greens both opposed the mass arrivals bill that will increase the time period seven-fold from four to 28 days.
The parties said it was unnecessary - even wrong - while the Immigration Minister was accusing them of being "wilfully blind" to the security risks.
Green MP Golriz Ghahraman said the select committee had considered more than 300 submissions that overwhelmingly opposed the legislation.
"We had the Human Rights Commission, the Director of the Office of Human Rights proceedings, Amnesty, the Red Cross, World Vision, churches, the community law centres absolutely begging the government not to go ahead with this bill.
"They pointed out the legal and human rights concerns but also that politically moves us into line with Australia; famously known to mistreat asylum seekers rather than the way most of the world is moving which is to a humanitarian aid model."
Ghahraman, a former asylum seeker herself, was concerned it would bring New Zealand into line with Australia's hard-line approach to asylum boats.
"We've heard for years, dare I say decades, there are these hordes of asylum seekers about to arrive. We've seen this play out in Australian politics in the worst possible way. New Zealand is further away and no one has ever come close to arriving here."
National MP Gerry Brownlee, who was also on the Parliamentary select committee considering the bill, agreed the changes were not necessary.
"I think it is quite adequate the way it is. What is the magic number? Apparently 29 is not a mass arrival but 30 is."
The bill was pitched as an "orderly and rights-compliant framework" to deal with the unlikely, but high impact, event of an asylum boat arriving on Aotearoa's shores in March, by the then-Immigration Minister Michael Wood.
Andrew Little, who now has the portfolio, said the legislation reflected updated risk assessments that other parties were actively ignoring.
"A departmental report was prepared for the committee and the committee refused to receive it. That is unprecedented, in my experience. That report included changes that responded to many of the concerns expressed by submitters."
Little said more care needed to be taken with legislation that deals with what he called a "pretty serious potential national security risk".
"It's incumbent on responsible MPs to take advice from officials. They can reject advice but the very first step is to at least receive it. They've declined even that step, it's a very serious matter."
He said if the other parties did not believe there was a risk they were being "wilfully blind".
Little said he was now working to get the risk assessment offered to the select committee declassified, so he could present it at the bill's second reading in a few weeks' time.
Ghahraman said if she had misunderstood the situation, she still stood with every authority on refugee or human rights law in New Zealand.