ACT leader David Seymour is framing a new immigration policy as a restoration of the basic bargain
upon which New Zealand was founded. The proposal seeks to move away from what Seymour describes as a general-purpose labour tap
, arguing that successive governments have failed to enforce existing rules and have allowed the rate of settlement to outpace the country’s ability to provide necessary infrastructure.
The party’s proposal suggests that New Zealand should welcome those who share values of democracy, freedom, and tolerance, while contributing to the economy and playing by the rules. This approach seeks to ensure that those entering the country align with these core national principles.
“Success requires a common set of expectations; respect our freedoms, uphold our democratic values, contribute to infrastructure, speak English, obey the law, and fill genuine gaps in the economy,” David Seymour, ACT Leader
Financial and social accountability in the six-point plan
The proposed shakeup centers on a six-point plan that outlines specific requirements for migrants. One of the most concrete changes is the introduction of a $6 per day infrastructure surcharge on temporary work visas, which would be added to existing charges. This measure is a direct response to the claim that settlement rates have overwhelmed infrastructure capacity.
The plan also targets the social safety net, proposing a five-year welfare stand-down for all residence class visa holders. This would prevent new residents from accessing welfare benefits for the first five years of their residency.
Beyond financial and welfare restrictions, the plan focuses on enforcement and language:
- Deportation: The party proposes that resident visa holders convicted of serious offenses would be deported, regardless of how long they have lived in the country.
- Visa Expirations: The party intends to expire categories under Accredited Employer Work visas every year to ensure they are filling actual skill gaps rather than remaining open indefinitely.
- Language Requirements: Basic English language requirements would be extended to all work visa types.
- Overstayer Enforcement: The plan calls for the establishment of a dedicated overstayer enforcement unit within Immigration New Zealand.
A clash over ‘dog-whistle’ politics and practicality
The proposal has been met with criticism from some legal professionals who view the framing as politically motivated. Speaking to RNZ, immigration lawyer Alistair McClymont characterized the policies as xenophobic dog-whistle politics
intended to appeal to specific voter bases, drawing parallels to the strategies used by New Zealand First.
McClymont challenged the practicality of several points in the plan. He argued that the welfare stand-down is unnecessary because the majority of migrants arrive with employment. Furthermore, he suggested that the infrastructure surcharge is counterintuitive, as migrants typically enter the country specifically to fill skill shortages that drive economic growth.
Regarding the proposed overstayer unit, McClymont noted that Immigration New Zealand already maintains a compliance team tasked with investigating overstayers, questioning whether the new unit would add any substantive value to the current regime.
Redefining the settler identity
The push for these changes is rooted in a specific interpretation of New Zealand’s history as a settler society. Seymour has linked the modern immigration system to the early arrivals, stating that from those in open boats 700 years ago to those arriving at Auckland Airport today, the country was built by people willing to make a journey to build something better.
However, the party contends that the current system has lost its way. Seymour argued that there is a disconnect between the stated strictness of the skilled-migration system and the actual outcomes of who is granted entry, suggesting that the system is not always effectively filtering for the high-skilled labor it intends to attract.
By emphasizing a common set of expectations
, ACT is attempting to redefine the relationship between the state and the migrant. In its official communications, the party suggests that those who benefit from the New Zealand way of life should also be those who support and contribute to it.
What to watch
As this proposal moves through the political process, the primary tension will be between the party’s desire for a value-based entry system and the economic reality of skill shortages. Observers should monitor whether the $6 daily surcharge creates a deterrent for the very skilled workers the party claims are necessary for growth. Additionally, the legal feasibility of deporting long-term residents for serious crimes will likely be a point of contention as the proposal is debated.