ACT And NZ First Pitch Tighter Immigration Controls, Others Warn Against Anti-Immigration Policies

With ACT and New Zealand First pitching tighter controls on immigration, National, Labour and the Greens are warning against populist anti-immigration policies.

Party leaders and spokespeople were giving speeches at the annual Immigration Conference in Auckland on Friday.

New Zealand First's Winston Peters launched more than a dozen proposals - almost all of which would curb or restrict migration.

Labour's Phil Twyford also came prepared, proposing a mix of policies including a citizenship pathway for children born to undocumented parents, a longer permanent residency process, and a review of the financial criteria for parent visas.

However, he spent much of his speech decrying a "dumpster fire" of right-wing populists demonising migrants and refugees.

National's Erica Stanford, who is the current minister, said she did not support ACT's proposal to abolish permanent resident visas.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

While some permanent residents could apply for citizenship, it would force those whose country of origin did not allow dual-passport holders to make a "heartbreaking" choice.

"Our permanent resident visa provides certainty and stability for people who have demonstrated a commitment to New Zealand. It also provides that competitive advantage ... to attract skilled workers," she said.

She also criticised the New Zealand First and Green amnesty for Pacific overstayer policies, saying such approaches "do not work".

"What they do fuel is the next generation of overstayers who think if they wait long enough they will have a pathway to residence or a valid visa."

Stanford told reporters National and NZ First were "very aligned" on immigration but parties proposing to seriously restrict immigration needed to explain who would be turned away, with nearly half of primary applications based on partnership visas and nearly as many on filling skills shortages.

"It is a real juxtaposition to say 'we want the best people', but then 'we're also going to restrict the numbers' ... they're proposing saying 'well if you're here illegally we'll give you some kind of amnesty', those two things are the polar opposite: 'if you're doing the wrong thing, welcome, but if you are people we just really need, well we're going to restrict your right to residence'."

She would not express concern, however, saying many parties "announce a range of policies that never actually make it through coalition negotiations. So it would be wrong of me to say I'm concerned about anything because we have to wait and see".

Greens spokesperson Ricardo Menendez March also criticised parties that would conflate New Zealand's challenges with immigration.

"In our country we face a huge amount of challenges: we have an infrastructure deficit, an ageing population, we have low wages compared to other comparable nations, we have a tax system that overtaxes work while it doesn't really want to touch wealth.

"None of these issues were caused by migrant workers, and none of these issues will be addressed by throwing dog whistles on getting tough on immigration, or extending the time that it takes for someone to become a permanent residency."

Governments trying to change residency requirements to meet labour demand, he said, ignored the reality that it was people who affected and who had often already put down roots.

The Greens' "settled residency pathway" policy would provide a pathway to residency for those who had been living in New Zealand for five years.

The party would also end 12-month stand-down periods requiring workers to leave the country between visas, and allow migrant workers to change jobs.

March defended the Greens' amnesty proposal, saying migrants often had no ties to the countries they were being deported to.

"[New Zealand has] around 20,000 or so overstayers in this country, and a regularisation programme won't add significant infrastructure pressures considering the people are already here, many of them are already working, many of them are already paying tax."

Parmjeet Parmar for the ACT Party talked up removing any ballot system for the parent resident visas and instead having a queue, and clarified that removing the permanent residence category would not stop migrants from settling in New Zealand.

"People will be able to stay here indefinitely, but there is going to be a physical presence test ... people will have to show that they have been here in New Zealand for 730 days, which is two years, in [any given period of] five years."

She said the policy was very similar to Australia and Canada's approach, warning that the immigration system was being "abused".

"I have heard many, many cases where people have gained permanent residency, but then have left New Zealand and haven't come back for very, very long time. I've also heard cases where people are coming back when they need our free or subsidised education system, or they need healthcare here to New Zealand.

ACT has also been pushing for stronger deportation laws, and Parmar highlighted the party's plan to establish a dedicated overstayer enforcement unit inside Immigration NZ.

"If somebody works illegally the lawful migrant who paid the fee and met the requirements is being undercut. If an employer exploits workers every responsible employer is forced to compete against someone who has decided the rules do not matter.

"That's why we have proposed a dedicated unit to deal with overstayers."

© Scoop Media