Visas, Politics and Butter Chicken?
You might be wondering what the connection between visas, politics and butter chicken could possibly be, although if you are already in New Zealand, those dots might join up a little quicker. For those of you who aren’t or at least don’t follow our mainstream media here, the link is all thanks to one of our more vocal politicians - the Honourable Shane Jones.
Known for his ability to provoke and to deliver his opinions fairly bluntly, Mr. Jones recently compared our soon to be signed, free-trade deal with India, as a "butter chicken tsunami" making its way to New Zealand. The provocative imagery being his rather creative (and poorly chosen) way of raising concerns around the visa and immigration components of that free-trade deal. Like most free trade deals we sign, the movement of people and access to visas, for the partner country, is a part of the negotiations.
In this case, we are offering a relatively modest 1,667 temporary visas to skilled and semi-skilled applicants from India, with another 1000 working holiday visas also being introduced on an annual basis. For Mr. Jones who is a member of NZ First - who have a fairly negative or at least reactive view on immigration, the prospect of these applicants coming here was akin to a wave of culinary terror.
The reality however, is that the number of visas on offer for this deal is miniscule, and pales in comparison to many of the other special visa arrangements we already have with other countries. As an example, we have 15,000 places per annum for UK Working Holiday Visa makers, and yet there are no concerns over an avalanche of bangers and mash. So Mr. Jones may have been embellishing a little or perhaps a lot, but when do politicians ever let the facts get in the way of a good sound bite.
However why the concern, why the comments, and does Mr. Jones’ fear of New Zealand being awash with Indian cuisine represent the popular view of our immigration system and its impacts on the country or just a bit of political spin? We take a look in this weeks article.
Trade, Visas & Mobility
Whilst most of our free-trade agreements don’t include a specific visa program, such as the deal we are doing with India now, we do have a lot of bilateral arrangements with countries to exchange people, sometimes set up as Working Holiday Schemes or in other cases as special work visa arrangements. Often these agreements are expanded or enhanced through free-trade agreements or are established closely alongside them.
Visas, Trade & Deals
While not all free trade deals include specific visas, they often include broader access for people and can be accompanied by separate bilateral visa agreements.
It makes sense, because often these deals or even our ongoing relationships with these countries that revolve around trade or security, create the desire for people to be able to spend time here. We have something pretty special to offer, and therefore leveraging it to our advantage either as a direct part of a deal or alongside it through a bilateral scheme such as a working holiday scheme, is an easy win.
These visa arrangements are usually capped, or relatively restrictive in nature, meaning that we tightly control how many and what type of people can access the schemes. They also provide significant benefit to our seasonal workforce - particularly tourism and hospitality in locations like Queenstown. The work there is often best suited to people here on a temporary basis, mixing work with travel, e.g. working holiday makers.
Alongside this we also have special work visas for specific countries (Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia to name a few). These usually aim to bring over specialty staff or highly skilled applicants who all need to have a job offer here. Often these people work in occupations that might be very specific to their country of origin and serve to fill a gap for the local population of migrants based in NZ, from those countries. Again that serves a very specific need in terms of the relative mix of our population.
However in terms of quantity, the number of visas offered and issued is a drop in the bucket, compared to the total that we bring across each year. In the case of the India deal, we are looking at 1,667, from which 1400 or so have to be in skilled, Green List occupations (jobs in high demand) and the rest in specialty jobs, such as chefs.
So where Mr. Jones might have seen a tsunami, the reality is more like a trickle. However since the free-trade deal was announced, the rhetoric from NZ First, and also some more sheltered and perhaps isolated pockets of our populace has been focussed on the impending “mass immigration” that is about to be unleashed. So why all the noise?
The Politics
Immigration tends to find its spotlight in the run-up to election, because as an election topic it is quite easy to find a division amongst the population of voters and certain parties will use that to their advantage. Having a free-trade deal, announced only seven months out from that election simply adds some spice to the dish. Ironically for the rest of the election cycle, immigration barely gets a mention or at least very little real press.
New Zealand, being a very small, but very ambitious country at the bottom of the world, is a pretty attractive location for many people around the globe - we have seen evidence of that with the popularity of our revamped Active Investor Visa. However that demand can also create tensions, when we face economic headwinds, and an increasing number of locals find fear (unfounded of course) in the prospect of migrants taking local jobs.
Special Work Visas
We have a large variety of special work visas already, some of which have very big numbers - the UK has 15,000 places under their Working Holiday Scheme.
The reality is that all of our skilled migrant category visas and the vast majority of our work visa programs require a job offer to begin with, and logically employers will search locally first - it’s easier and cheaper.
So, when there are fewer jobs available in the local market and more locals seeking out those jobs, our migrant numbers will reduce and we have seen that recently. Equally when we have more jobs and need more skills that we cannot fill locally, our demand for offshore talent will naturally increase. This is the very reason why our skilled migrant system has no set caps or quotas - it is demand driven, with the demand being controlled by employers and the labour market.
In a similar way, the visas being offered under this free-trade deal will very likely be tied to job offers, within very specific occupations and so if those jobs don’t exist or they can be filled by local candidates, then visas won’t be issued. However that logic doesn’t spin well, if you are trying to secure votes. So in the run up to the election, parties like NZ First will utilise the sentiment that exists within a very small population of voters who see our immigration system as being too broad.
NZ First’s discussions and commentary on the number of visas being issued under this deal, along with how they might work has been completely incorrect, but of course the rhetoric helps to nab a few votes here and there. Rather ironically, Winston Peters, the leader of NZ First, and the biggest voice on anti-immigrant sentiment in our political system, was previously the Minister for Racing, who oversaw the grant of visas to a small number of specialist workers to help finish off the creation of a synthetic race-track during our covid border closures - all while the country was locking out family members from coming in to the country.
Immigration is a hot-topic when it needs to be and for politicians it can create some great sound-bites - the question however is whether those sound bites reflect a wider, negative sentiment towards migrants or our immigration system as a whole.
Is New Zealand Anti-Immigrant?
It is an easy label to reach for, especially when you hear public figures like Mr. Jones or his boss Mr. Peters grabbing the media spotlight, but it is also a label that does not fit the reality. New Zealand is not anti-immigrant. It is selective, cautious, and at times inconsistent. Those are very different things. For decades, immigration has been a core part of New Zealand’s economic and social fabric, out of necessity.
Perception vs. Reality
In the run up to the election, immigration is often rolled out as a bit of political sideshow, where certain parties clamour for votes, pushing an anti-immigrant sentiment.
Entire sectors of our economy rely on our ability to bring in skills from offshore - healthcare, construction, aged care, agriculture, technology, education, all have gaps that simply cannot be filled locally.
The country knows this and policy settings, even when restrictive, are still built around attracting people who can contribute.
At the same time, New Zealand is a small, geographically isolated country with finite infrastructure, housing pressure, transport constraints, and public service capacity that all have to feed into immigration decisions. When those systems feel stretched or there is a perceived stretch from something like this free-trade deal, the political response is fairly predictable.
There is also a cultural layer to this. New Zealand tends to value control over volume. It prefers managed migration over open doors, which makes sense given our size and location. That can come across as resistance, particularly to people used to larger or more flexible immigration systems. However our approach is more about pacing than rejection. The reality, as always, sits somewhere in the middle.
New Zealand wants migrants, it needs migrants, however it wants the “right” migrants, at the “right” time, on terms that align with economic needs. That balancing act is not always executed well, and when it is not, it can feel like the door is closed. In truth, the door is rarely closed. It just does not open as easily, and it does not open the same way for everyone.
When The Dust Settles
As we head towards the November elections, discussions on migration will continue from both sides. We are already seeing the relatively typical commentary from NZ First, who will use events such as the India free-trade deal to try and scare the populace in to believing we are about to be washed away by a tsunami of butter chicken, and then on the opposite side we have celebrations over the success of our active investor visa bringing in billions of dollars of investment - two very opposing views in the same week.
The reality is that once the elections come and go, immigration as a discussion point will drift back in to the background. We will still talk about it from time to time, but it will no longer feature as the star attraction, when there is less political capital to be gained - less butter chicken and more chat over the BBQ.
As a small country with limited access to talent, we rely very heavily on migrants to keep our economy ticking. Whether it is staffing our hospitals, teaching our children or even building state of the art horse-racing tracks, we rely on bringing in skills to do the things we need to do. Even in the current economic climate where things are more challenging we are still seeking out skills from offshore.
What we (and by we, I mean our politicians) need to be mindful of however, is the signals we send, when we have these debates. Apart from Mr. Jones’ comments being very inappropriate in any setting, how we discuss immigration has a direct impact on how we attract the skills we need. Migrants have choices and as a country seeking talent we have competitors, so the signals we send not just during the election but at all times are really important in terms of our ability to compete for that talent.
For now however, Mr. Jones (if he ever reads this) can be assured that there will be no tsunami, cyclone or avalanche of any description - butter chicken or otherwise.
Until next week!
