Almost every day, concerns about New Zealand’s record immigration program are vented in the media, posing big problems for the incumbent National Government as the nation heads to the polls on 23 September.
Sensing the growing backlash, the opposition Labour Party has vowed to cut immigration into New Zealand by 20,000 to 30,000 in order to take pressure off housing, infrastructure, and overall living standards. From Interest.co.nz:
[Labour’s] Election 2017 immigration policy are aimed at cutting the number of foreign workers and students issued work, study and post-study visas by 20,000-30,000 per year.
Labour Party leader Andrew Little said Monday it was “time for a breather on immigration”… Labour has attacked current migration settings as contributing to housing demand, traffic congestion, school overcrowding and pressure on other public services. It has also said not enough has been done to attract construction workers or train locals in the trades…
The “moderate, sensible reforms” proposed would “reduce the pressure on our cities while ensuring we get the skilled workers our country needs,” [Little] said.
“New Zealand is a country built on immigration. When new migrants come here, they enrich our country and make New Zealand a better place. We’ve always welcomed migrants to our country, and will continue to do do.”
But Little added that at 130,000, or the population of Tauranga, four times more people had arrived in New Zealand since 2013 than had been forecast.
“After nine years, National has failed to make the necessary investments in housing, infrastructure, and public services that are needed to cope with this rapid population growth. It’s contributed to the housing crisis, put pressure on hospitals and schools, and added to congestion on roads,” he said.
Immigration needed to be sustainable, he said. “We reviewed the system from top to bottom and found that several areas were being abused and not delivering the results Kiwis expect.”
Existing policies had created “a backdoor to residency via low-level study and low-skill work, he said…
As usual, the business lobby has decried Labour’s policy, claiming it would exacerbate skills shortages and endanger the education sector’s citizenship exports:
BusinessNZ chief executive Kirk Hope says that coming further to immigration restrictions already imposed by the Government, Labour’s crack-down could make it harder for businesses to fill jobs.
“Employers are finding it hard to fill positions in hospitality, IT, horticulture, construction and other sectors. The more restrictions that are placed on lower-skilled migrants coming here, the harder it will be for the economy to grow,” he says…
“Private Training Enterprises offering lower-level courses and schools and colleges and local communities hosting international students in all parts of New Zealand could be significantly impacted by this policy,” Hope says.
New Zealand Prime Minister, Bill English, also claims Labour’s immigration policy would stall economic growth:
Attacking the policy, English argued the announcement read as Labour proposing to cut construction migrant numbers from over 7,000 to 1,500 a year. Adding changes to student visas and post-study visas, this would “stall the economy.”
“It’ll deprive businesses of the skills they need to enable them to make the investments they want to make to grow New Zealand,” he said.
In contrast, English argued National was “up for the challenges of dealing with sustained success and growth for New Zealand”…
English argued immigration was not the only driving force for the economy “You grow by, for instance, by diversifying your export base, and Labour’s answer to that is to shut down one of the faster-growing export industries, which is about exporting education.”
Asked then how cutting migration by 30,000 would therefore stall the economy, he replied: “Growing the economy the way it’s growing right now needs a set of skills. We need people to build houses, we need people to build infrastructure.”
Concerns with New Zealand’s immigration system have been around for some time. The Salvation Army, the Treasury, the RBNZ, and former RBNZ special adviser Mike Reddell have all claimed that New Zealand’s immigration program does not take sufficient account of whether their are genuine labour shortages, and may be depriving incumbent residents of employment opportunities.
Then there are the legitimate concerns surrounding the growing housing shortages in Auckland, where immigration-fueled population growth has easily outpaced dwelling construction, thus placing upward pressure on house prices and rents.
Viewed in this light, reducing New Zealand’s immigration intake to more sensible and sustainable levels is excellent policy. Australia’s Labor Party should take note of its counterparts across the pond.
