After a 1 week pause for the Independence Day celebrations, the Senate Hearings on Immigration resumed today with the current Immigration Director, Diana Locke, as the returning witness.
Now, as viewers will remember, she has already given testimony for 2 sessions, but the Senate Special Select Committee still had many questions for her today, and she had another marathon 4-hour conversation with them.
Again, most of it was housekeeping matters, but there were several items which caught our attention. The first is that the Senate Committee has learned that 2 former UDP ministers are still in the business of immigration services.
Now, if you'll know very well that a recurring theme in these Senate hearings is that immigration agents are a corrupting influence at the Department. It was flagged by the Auditor General numerous times in her reports, and changes at the Department have been instituted to fix the loopholes in the systems at Immigration Department that these agents abused to get document for persons who didn't qualify.
So, we were surprised to hear that there are still these immigration agents who are carrying out services on behalf of other persons. Today, the Committee's Protem Chairman, Mark Lizarraga brought up that topic with the Immigration Director.
Here's how the exchange went:
Mark Lizarraga - Senator for Private Sector
"Now, director, the last time we visited the department we encountered at least one ex-minister, as you know, who openly professed to be an agent and we understood from people that there is another minister that provides similar services and is frequent at the department. How do you feel about that and what if any are you doing to address this influence that they may or may not have?"
Diana Locke - Director of Immigration and Nationality
"I don't know that they have any influence, but I do certainly know that the staff is not happy with it. I have spoken to them; I have spoken to the persons concerned. The one you met at the parking lot does not come by very often, the other one you referred to, some days I wonder if he works there. I have raised this matter with my ministry, because I don't like the image that it portrays because it gives the impression that the department is facilitating the request of the political directorate which is not the case and I have spoken to that individual. He persists on coming back. He says that it is a public place and he has had a lot to say but I have to put that aside because it is not the right thing to do. The staff has already been informed and I'm sure he's listening to me today. The staff has already been informed that when we go to our new location that no member of the public will be allowed behind the counter in any of the areas where we have and we are taking steps to actually put fingerprint machines so that areas area actually restricted and only those persons who work in those areas can access those areas. In my office I would look up at the screen, because we do have cameras, I don't have time to watch them very often, but you do see a few people who I have begun to identify as agents when I see them often enough. As I have said before and as I will say again, I don't think that is a healthy process, I don't like it because it gives the impression that there are some people that are more favored. Our regulations in our laws require that persons appear. I have no objection to a family member. You coming in and on behalf of a niece, a nephew, a child, but when a person continues to be there on a regular basis, clearly nobody spends that amount of time in any location for nothing. These are people whom, I've been told, have been frequenting at lands, they're now at immigration - Minister Barnett says they are not there anymore - and we are taking steps. I'm trying to be nice about it, I'm trying to go about it the nice way but I hope that we don't have to go…and I'm counting on my ministry to support me in ensuring that this is something that is addressed."
Mark Lizarraga
"But with the greatest of respect director, one would think that you could clearly set areas that are off bounds to the general public."
Diana Locke
"Yes, we do."
Mark Lizarraga
"But that is not being adhered to. Is that what you are saying?"
Diana Locke
"Yes, sometimes that is the case."
Mark Lizarraga
"Because of who these individuals are?"
Diana Locke
"Recently, as I've said, there has only been one individual that's really persistent and he knows who he is."
Mark Lizarraga
"We know who he is, but I'm saying, director, is why is it you feel you cannot stop him from entering beyond the front line where the general public is supposed to be at least."
Diana Locke
"Out of respect for the fact that that individual was a former minister, I have addressed this matter with my ministry, I cannot stop that individual if he wishes to go on the second floor if he wishes to have a meeting with my CEO or my minister, but I do have objections to his being in and around the office with the frequency with which he does it."
Email
Print