MP Yang lobbied to overturn SIS block
Politician asked ministers to help with Chinese-born applicant’s bid for sensitive Defence job
Embattled MP Jian Yang lobbied ministers in a bid to overturn a national security block on a Chinese-born job applicant taking up a sensitive position in the New Zealand Defence Force. Months after first taking a seat in Parliament following the 2011 election, Jian took up the case of an aggrieved applicant for a New Zealand Defence Force job who had failed background checks conducted by the Security Intelligence Service (SIS).
Yang told the Herald he was merely acting on behalf of a constituent and had done nothing wrong. “I had simply sought answers on the constituent’s behalf through the appropriate channels, as is the responsibility of every member of Parliament,” he said.
A February 2012 letter obtained under the Official Information Act written by then-Defence Minister Jonathan Coleman to the applicant copies in Yang “who has approached my office on your behalf”, and noted Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson had also been lobbied.
Andrew Little, the Minister Responsible for the Government Communications Security Bureau and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, last night said security vetting is a “vital part of protecting the New Zealand Government’s most sensitive information”.
“I can’t discuss individual cases but generally speaking, I would be uncomfortable if an MP took up the issue of SIS clearance with a minister.”
The nationality of the applicant is not stated or is redacted in documents, but the letter states the person had been a New Zealand citizen for fewer than 10 years and Yang told the Herald he considered the person to be part of the Chinese community in New Zealand.
Documents detailing this lobbying effort have come to light as the issue of China’s expanding influence — and Yang’s longundisclosed 15-year history studying and teaching in China’s military apparatus — has become an issue of national and international prominence.
Last week the Wall Street Journal, quoting an Australian intelligence official, reported New Zealand and its neighbour both tabled the issue of China’s domestic interference at a July meeting in Ottawa of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance.
The Herald understands the SIS were first alerted to Yang’s background soon after his election to Parliament in 2011, and the agency began making further inquiries about him two years ago.
The position sought by the applicant is redacted, but the letter specifies it required applicants to pass SIS vetting to enable access to information classed as “Secret”.
Positions in the Defence Force requiring “Secret” clearance, which is one rung below the most-strict “Top Secret” rank and one above the bottom tier “Confidential”, typically involve entry-level
intelligence collection or analysis.
Coleman’s letter said Human Rights Act protections against discrimination did not apply to vetting, and factors such as national origin — and the national origin of partners and relatives — as well as political opinions could prevent someone from gaining clearance.
The Herald understands the SIS is particularly sensitive over connections to China, with one source familiar with vetting saying they were not aware of anyone born in China ever being granted clearance.
A spokesperson for the SIS said they would not comment on individual cases, and their role in this case was limited to providing the initial recommendation to the NZDF.
“NZSIS would not be involved in any subsequent queries to a chief executive regarding security clearance decisions,” the spokesperson said.
The February letter from Coleman said vetting was to ensure “truthworthiness and loyalty to New Zealand”.
It required applicants to be New Zealand citizens and live in the country for 10 continuous years, or to have been based in Five Eyes allies — the United States, Australia, Canada or the United Kingdom — and have a “background history that is verifiable and can be positively assessed as complete and appropriate”.
Coleman noted the job had been advertised incorrectly on Trade Me, where a minimum five-year period of citizenship had been mentioned, but said the applicant would not have passed even this lower bar.
“The requirement to have a background history that is verifiable and can be positively assessed would still have applied. The outcome would therefore have been the same.” Yang declined an interview. However the MP said in an email that his involvement in this case was limited to approaching the ministers and ceased following Coleman’s letter.
“Once I had received the response, I took no further action,” he said.
“I did not know the family until they approached me in February 2012 and have spoken to them only once since, at a community event when they thanked me for my help and told me they had moved on.”