Seymour bemoans critics reducing immigration debate to ‘soap opera’ politics

Source: Radio New Zealand

David Seymour says ACT’s immigration policy is a long-held approach aimed at tackling real challenges, and those claiming he’s competing with New Zealand First should be more constructive.

Prominent critics of his immigration policy include opposition parties, an immigration lawyer, a sociologist – and his coalition partner.

But Seymour doesn’t agree with them.

“Some people like to belittle our political debate as a soap opera. I view it as politicians listening and responding to people’s concerns to produce better policy for our country,” he told RNZ.

“When you have 20,000 overstayers at large in the country, when you have literally 100 times more fast food workers than biomedical engineers coming in under the skilled visa, and when you have a serious problem with infrastructure keeping up with population growth, I think it behooves political parties to respond to that.”

Asked for evidence of the fast food claim, ACT pointed to 2480 fast food workers being approved since 2022, compared to 30 biomedical engineers.

‘Straight-up dog whistle’ or ‘doesn’t even touch the sides?’ – the criticisms

NZ First leader Winston Peters on Monday posted on social media the policy was a “good effort”, but “unfortunately it doesn’t even touch the sides”.

“We would encourage ACT to watch this space for when NZ First will be announcing what a real and comprehensive immigration policy actually looks like.”

That came a day after Seymour unveiled the policy, which promises more deportations, renewed focus on overstayer enforcement, a $6-a-day infrastructure fee for temporary work visas, and a five-year ban on welfare payments for residence-class visa holders.

Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said it was a very complex sector, “which is why knee jerk policy at the election that’s not carefully considered and well thought through can be quite damaging”.

She said the $6-a-day fee ignored the moves already afoot to “carefully, proportionately and reasonably collect additional levies from migrants for some of the costs that they directly impose in like the health or education sector”, and the fee would put off the best and brightest from coming to New Zealand.

“They’ll just go somewhere else, but those employers who desperately need migrants like in our rural sector for example, they will be the ones who end up paying that fee.”

She said it amounted to an $11,000 upfront payment at the application stage, plus another $11,000 for their partner.

“No other country levies a migrant like that at such a high rate anywhere in the world, we would be a massive outlier. And so the question is, who’s going to come? And the answer is nobody. And the second thing is, who will pay? And the answer is the employer.”

She said people were uncomfortable with Labour’s post-Covid approach to “throw the floodgates open”, but Seymour “doesn’t understand immigration”.

“He said ‘oh, we have to renew the categories every year’ – there is no category for fast food workers, no categories like that exist … we have a demand driven system. I

“If you are in an area and you need a fast food worker, you have to check that there are no New Zealanders available to do the job … the fact is that there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of outlets across New Zealand who prepare fast food, and they need workers.”

Labour’s immigration spokesperson Phil Twyford said it showed a “bidding war” between ACT and NZ First on immigration, and it was “pure election year politics”.

“The parties of the right are feasting on each other’s votes right now, and they’re in a struggle for survival, and I think that immigration policy is too important to New Zealand’s future to allow it to be politicised by these small parties who are chasing a few votes,” Twyford said.

“NZ First is consciously copying the political tactics of the Reform Party in the UK. But I don’t think actually that there’s large numbers of people in New Zealand who are extremely anxious about immigration … it should have no place in our politics and our society.”

Asked what he thought of the policy overall, Green Party immigration spokesperson Ricardo Menendez March’s first words were that ACT was “competing with NZ First to see who can blame our migrant neighbours”.

“This is a Trump-inspired approach that reeks of wanting to set up an ICE-like unit in our own country, to effectively lead to deportation of undocumented migrants that are not the source of unaffordable housing or a lack of adequate infrastructure,” he said.

He said it was “a straight-up dog whistle”.

“David Seymour first came for the Treaty, then beneficiaries and low-wage workers, and now he’s after our migrant communities. It’s all he knows how to do – play the politics of division.”

Sociology professor Paul Spoonley told Morning Report on Monday it was surprising to see ACT propose more bureaucracy and a new tax, but Seymour was clearly “not prepared to concede the strict controls on immigration space to New Zealand First”.

He also questioned what values migrants would be asked to sign up to, and who would decide that.

“I mean, is there the Treaty of Waitangi in there? I suspect not … how do immigrants demonstrate agreement with those values? And of course, what happens if you breach those values? So, it’s all a bit vague for me.”

Immigration lawyer Alistair McClymont also told RNZ the policy did not add anything to the current system, and it seemed ACT “has seen the success that New Zealand First has had with xenophobic dog-whistle politics”.

Twyford would not go so far as to say ACT’s policy was dog-whistling, but it was “all about trying to look tough – and they are definitely trying – it’s a defensive move politically against New Zealand First”.

“It’s politics. It’s not about what is the best policy for the future of New Zealand.”

‘There are real challenges’ – Seymour

Seymour rejected those criticisms.

He said he had worked with McClymont, who lived in his electorate of Epsom, and he would have hoped he would enter the debate in a “more constructive spirit”.

“I think it’s a shame that someone like Alistair … tends to reduce things to almost a sort of soap opera version of politics. He needs to recognise that there are real challenges with immigration policy. It’s not delivering what it says on the tin.”

He pushed back at Peters’ tweet, saying the NZ First leader was ignoring the position was a long-held ACT view.

“These policies are things that I’m on the record talking about as far back as 10 years ago,” Seymour said.

He also said Peters was wrong to oppose the Free Trade Agreement with India on the basis of immigration – because the projected increase in migrants would only amount to about 6 percent of visas currently issued to Indian nationals.

“To oppose the Indian Free Trade Agreement and all its benefits on the basis of immigration concern, that’s not just barking up the wrong tree, it’s barking in the wrong forest,” Seymour said.

“If we’re worried about immigration we should address immigration policy, not chop our nose off to spite our face.”

In terms of democratic values, Seymour highlighted fraud and overstayers as things that should be targeted.

“Illegal overstayers, you’ve got people whose first act in New Zealand is to break the law – and as someone who’s helped many migrants over the years – have seen the stigma that migrants can face – it doesn’t help and it’s not fair when there’s a whole lot of other people who just aren’t following any of the rules.”

Those concerns would be tackled with the additional deportations and the new overstayer taskforce in Immigration, he said.

He also rejected suggestions from Spoonley that the changes to the Accredited Employer Work Visa scheme could unnecessarily increase bureaucracy.

“We tend to get types of skills that we don’t necessarily need so much of, and they just linger on for a long time while new skill shortages are not always recognised in a timely fashion, so an annual upgrade or review of what sorts of skills can have new visas issued is what we have proposed.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand