This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS E F T O SECTION 01 OF 02 WELLINGTON 000563 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NOFORN 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR EAP/ANP, G/TIP 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KWMN PHUM PREL ELAB AMGT NZ TIP
SUBJECT: NEW ZEALAND TIP REPORT: LESSONS LEARNED 
 
REF: A. WELLINGTON 521 
     ¶B. SINGAPORE 1889 
 
¶1. (SBU/NF) Following the turbulent June 14 release of the 
2004 TIP report, which named New Zealand for the first time 
(ref a), Embassy Wellington would like to add its strong 
support to the recommendations contained in Embassy 
Singapore's recent excellent cable (ref b).  While the GNZ is 
hypersensitive to any perceived criticism of its human rights 
record (and a negative response to the TIP report was fully 
anticipated), the language used in the New Zealand narrative 
of the TIP report directly undermined the credibility of the 
report and negatively affected the USG's image with the NZ 
public.  The report, as released, allowed the GNZ and 
domestic media to shift off-message from the fight against 
trafficking.  The Prime Minister, other senior government 
officials and local commentators instead challenged the 
credibility of the TIP report's NZ-specific narrative. 
 
¶2. (SBU/NF) Drawing on ref b, Post would like to offer its 
own observations and suggestions for improving the TIP report 
format, making the report's narrative more accurate and 
thereby allowing us to hold a more constructive dialogue on 
ways and means of combating trafficking in our host country. 
 
-- First and foremost, embassies must draft the initial 
country narratives, as is done for the Human Rights Report 
and the International Religious Freedom Report, with far 
greater success. 
 
- Drafting the country narrative of the TIP report at post 
would significantly reduce the time commitment currently 
required.  This year, post first sought to address the 
extensive questionnaire provided, and then Post and the Desk 
were obliged to dedicate substantial amount of time to 
editing and attempting to make G/TIP's initial narrative 
accurate. 
 
- As a SEP Post, we are fully cognizant of the need to 
prioritize increasing demands on limited resources.  In New 
Zealand, however, the P/E officer tasked with drafting the 
HRR is already in contact with the same Government agencies 
and NGOs used for the TIP Report, and is best placed to 
address questions on both topics with the same set of 
interlocutors.  As over 60 percent of information included in 
the questionnaire is not used in the report, Post could 
reduce the amount of time used outlining legislation or 
policies that do not change from year to year. 
 
- Another major concern for Post was a perceived attitude 
among G/TIP that New Zealand's report and tier designation 
should somehow follow the report and tier designation of 
Australia -- despite the vastly different scale and type of 
human trafficking concerns in both countries. 
 
-- Inclusion in the report is currently based on a 
Department-set threshold of 100 individuals.  In drafting 
answers to G/TIP's initial questionnaire, Post was unable to 
find solid evidence of over 100 cases of human trafficking in 
the 2003 calendar year.  G/TIP's decision to include NZ was 
therefore based on a single multi-year study that found 
evidence of child prostitution.  We are unaware of any other 
country having been listed solely on the grounds of internal 
childhood prostitution.  While this does trigger NZ's 
inclusion in the report by the definitions of our 
legislation, it is not a definition accepted by New 
Zealanders.  They consider us to be "stretching" the commonly 
accepted definition of trafficking to include NZ. 
 
-- The TIP Report should be made as inclusive as possible, 
making it a global report that incorporates an assessment of 
every country in the world - again, as is the case with the 
Department's annual Human Rights report. 
 
-- The tier system provoked the GoNZ concerns to focus on how 
to &get off the list,8 instead of how to improve their 
fight against trafficking.  By including all countries, the 
focus would hopefully return to the content of the report, 
and not the Tier designation or who is and is not included. 
 
¶4.  (SBU/NF) Focus on the positive and means of best 
advancing country practices in the fight against trafficking. 
 
- Make a list of Best Practices available to reporting 
officers.  For example, New Zealand has proved extremely 
flexible in ending visa-free regimes for countries that are 
suspected of trafficking victims to NZ.  In addition, despite 
the lack of a national coordinator, NZ has been a leader in 
information sharing between domestic law enforcement and 
social agencies. 
- Provide a set of recommendations for reference on ways 
countries in the report might better address their 
trafficking situation.  Such recommendations would provide 
valuable topics with which to engage host governments, media 
and the wider public at the time of the report's release. 
For instance, the New Zealand narrative of the report 
contains one recommendation ) the creation of a national 
coordinator for trafficking issues.  Unfortunately, 
discussion of this useful step was lost as New Zealand 
officials and media generally dismissed the NZ narrative 
because of choice of language used. 
 
¶5. (SBU/NF) Post would like to reiterate its strong 
commitment to the principles underlying the production of an 
annual TIP Report.  We believe that this report is part of a 
process that does not begin and end with the release of the 
report, and looks forward to effectively contributing to the 
fight against trafficking. 
Burnett