By Steve Kilgallon of 
File photo. Photo: 123RF
Immigration officers say they've been told to ignore criminal convictions and investigations, not to read supporting documents on visa applications, and not to check work visas at the border in a "light touch" drive to grant more visas faster.
Multiple past and present Immigration NZ (INZ) staff have told Stuff about their concerns with what they say is a completely dysfunctional visa regime that has allowed rampant fraud - including visa staff themselves exposing the flaws by using pictures of cats and dogs as supporting documents in a dummy visa application that was allegedly approved.
Staff had already told Stuff of issues with the Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV) scheme, with one saying the system was "completely f****d".
Stuff has since seen an email from a senior INZ official, Peter Elms, which admits that the AEWV visa has "been manipulated by bad actors".
But more staff have come forward saying the issues are widespread across the system, including visitor and student visas, where a similar "streamlined" approach has been mandated.
Multiple officials have told Stuff that:
- they were told to ignore criminal convictions and investigations when granting visas and residency to individuals
- they were told not to open and check attachments on visa applications as this would delay processing times
- some visa staff concocted an application and attached photos of household pets instead of supporting documents to prove that attachments were not being read
- border staff told not to query work visa holders and accept them at "face value"
- staff told to take a "streamlined" approach to visitor visas
- officers were warned if they did not consider enough applications in a week and given 'shout-outs' if they processed the most applications.
One officer said when they tried to decline applications under the AEWV scheme, they were overruled by senior managers.
In one instance, where they held genuine concerns about an employer exploiting migrants, they said their manager told them "it had gone over their heads" and he'd been instructed to issue the visa.
"We would always back down when pushed," said the officer. "There was this idea we had the power to have the final say, but it's absolutely not true. It was very much 'get this through, get the numbers up, approve it'."
They said one colleague had said: "These migrants know what they are getting into."
The officer said many staff were deeply unhappy about the directives. "A lot of people have left and gone to other jobs because it didn't sit well with their conscience." A lot were emotionally affected because they wanted to do the right thing ... but were hobbled by senior management."
The officer also said they had attempted to decline accreditation to an employer with a criminal record involving sexual assault. They said they were told the offending wasn't pertinent to their role as an employer: "It was appalling."
Another officer said on multiple occasions they had placed warnings on applicants who had committed fraud or theft and still issued visas. "It's true that we are told to ignore criminal convictions, and to approve residence visas for individuals under investigation."
A third officer said that they'd been involved in a case where a migrant had recently received three criminal convictions, and was under investigation for working in a second job in breach of their visa.
The officer said they were asked to remove a warning note on the client's file, so they could be issued residency, and when they refused, it was removed anyway.
"Visa staff say they are being told by senior managers to ignore alerts on clients for crimes or breaching their visa conditions: they are told to look the other way," the officer said. "I was told there were way worse clients than this guy being approved."
Border issues
Border staff have been told not to intervene in cases where there are question marks about newly-arriving work visa holders.
"They are told not to look, the visa is issued, the job is not to check, let them go," said one official. "They see people applying for butcher's jobs who've never held a knife in their lives."
It's understood this has caused tensions with some Customs officials, who had reported concerns only to see no action taken.
One official said: "Theoretically, INZ should have already assessed and managed risk… In reality, it's not the case and border is at full capacity." Another said they estimated 200 cases a day of suspicious arrivals.
Stuff has seen emails from Peter Elms, INZ's national manager (border), telling border staff not to "complete a reassessment" of work visas on arriving migrants.
"We should accept the visa at face value unless we become aware of new information (not known at the time the visa was granted) that would confirm the person is not eligible for the visa they hold," Elms wrote, describing that scenario as "the exception".
Border staff should not "review other information considered during the visa application" when interviewing people at the border "unless relevant to an overall bona fides concern for verification purposes".
Another email from Elms to staff said the system was "under pressure" due to high visa application volumes and said INZ wanted to improve visitor visa processing times and "reduce barriers" preventing officers from making faster decisions, so would relax some rules to temporarily "allow a light-touch assessment".
A 'general instruction' to visa staff, valid until November this year, had a similar message around visitor visas, reclassifying some high-risk applications for a more "streamlined" approach - for those, staff were to have a "quick scan of documents".
Stuff has already reported on a similar instruction issued around work visas.
Visa approvals
The story of the household pets was because some INZ staff were so concerned about the failure to open and study attachments before issuing visas they wanted to test out the theory. The visa was allegedly granted.
Multiple staff said part of the issue was INZ's expensive visa operating system, ADEPT, which had largely removed human decision-making from the process. One official said they were directed not to make notes on client's files in ADEPT, meaning there were no records of areas of concern.
Multiple staff said officers were informally directed to not open supporting documents so that visas could be processed faster and were asked to explain themselves if they did. "Visa branch staff are under pressure not to open any documents, just approve, approve and approve," said one.
When they did open documents, said one, they saw multiple examples of faked bank statements, CVs, references and even on one occasion, a document marked as proof of a genuine visit was simply a piece of paper with the typed words "bless you".
Officers said they were threatened with Performance Improvement Plans if they didn't make enough decisions - and "shout-outs" were made to those who made the most. "If someone were to look into the quality of these decisions, it will be a disaster… If we're not allowed to spend the required time on an application ... the results will be catastrophic."
Staff said they were speaking out because they had no other way of forcing change. "I've worked here a long time, and I've never seen the morale to be so bad," said one. "There are so many problems ... that staff are actually hoping the whole thing turns to s.... Upper management will only listen if the stories hit the media."
National Party immigration spokesperson Erica Stanford said INZ staff had been warning managers for months of the issues, and were so frustrated they felt the media was their only solution.
"They are good people who want the best for the country, they don't want to see migrant exploitation. They know it is happening - but they are the ones who are told to close their eyes and hit 'approve'."
Green immigration spokesperson Ricardo Menendez-March said INZ had seen huge staff turnover, was under-resourced and needed better funding to "give integrity to the accreditation system".
INZ declined a request for an interview. In a statement, acting head of immigration Catriona Robinson said the agency constantly "review and adjust our settings" and said revamped settings had been part of the effort to address skills shortages and speed economic recovery after the borders opened.
Robinson said INZ had "streamlined the process for low and medium-risk visitor visa applications and this is having a positive impact for customers and reducing queues" but was "deeply cognisant" of duties to keep NZ safe and secure from immigration risk, and also reduce unnecessary bureaucracy which is "why we continually review and adjust our settings to strike a balance between attracting the people we want and keeping out the people we don't want".
She denied any "specific instruction" to disregard criminal convictions or investigations. She said people with such convictions or providing false or misleading information would only get a visa with a character waiver, "considered on its individual merits".
She also denied any instruction not to open visa attachments, but said that for low-risk visitor visa applications "officers may not need to examine attachments if certain standard health, character and identity checks have been completed".
She said it wasn't border staff's role to "re-assess" applications, and they had been told to enable those with legitimate visas to gain entry unless they had fresh information.
She couldn't provide accurate numbers of fraudulent visas arriving in the country, "but anecdotally we do not believe the figure is anywhere near as high as that provided to you".
She said she could not address every concern the Stuff offered "but encourage you to give us details so we can investigate further". She did not directly address the cats-and-dogs visa.
She said staff were encouraged to speak up with specific concerns.
- This story was originally published by Stuff
