Winston Peters, the colourful populist leader of the New Zealand First party, told a gathering hosted by Grey Power magazine this month that the country must prioritise migration for the benefit of New Zealanders. “We have the most irresponsible immigration system,” Mr Peters said in comments from the speech shared on his social media. “We need to bring in people New Zealand needs, not that need us. We don’t need more Uber drivers or chefs, as if we’re going to eat our way to wealth like Hansel and Gretel.” Mr Peters’ office has been contacted for comment. It comes as New Zealand records sharp falls in immigration numbers, a year after introducing sweeping visa reforms to bring down “unsustainable net migration” to ease pressure on housing, schools and hospitals. Annual net migration into New Zealand, with a population of 5.4 million, peaked in the year ended October 2023 at 135,500 people, with 234,800 arrivals in that period, including a near-record 173,000 non-citizens. The latest figures from Statistics New Zealand reveal net migration in the 12 months to April was just 21,300, off the back of a 27 per cent fall in arrivals to 145,000 and a 15 per cent increase in departures to 123,700. Australia, by contrast, continues to see high immigration despite similar commitments by Labor to bring numbers back to “sustainable” levels. “While there is no doubt Winston Peters is a colourful character, he has a point,” said Daniel Wild, deputy executive director of the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), a conservative think tank. “Immigration for immigration’s sake is code for lower wages, higher house prices and less economic growth per capita. In Australia we are facing an economic and humanitarian disaster because our leaders have failed to plan for such a rapid increase in migration intakes post-pandemic.” New Zealand’s conservative coalition government, which came to power in the November 2023 election, announced a suite of visa changes last April seeking to wind back the post-Covid surge. Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said at the time the changes to New Zealand’s Accredited Employer Worker Visa (AEWV) scheme would ensure the country was attracting the skills it needed and reduce the vulnerability of migrants to exploitation. “Getting our immigration settings right is critical to this government’s plan to rebuild the economy,” she said. “The government is focused on attracting and retaining the highly skilled migrants such as secondary teachers, where there is a skill shortage. At the same time we need to ensure that New Zealanders are put to the front of the line for jobs where there are no skills shortages.” The changes included an English language requirement for migrants applying for low skilled level 4 and 5 roles under the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO), such as manual labour, aged care or fast food workers. A minimum skills and work experience threshold for most AEWV roles was also introduced, and the maximum continuous stay for most level 4 and 5 roles was reduced from five years to three years. “I am bringing in a suite of changes that will improve the AEWV scheme and ensure we are better testing the local labour market and reducing the risks of putting New Zealanders out of work,” Ms Stanford said. “Many of these are not new, but rather a return to pre-pandemic settings that better balanced the needs of business with the wider interests of New Zealand. It is important that the AEWV settings facilitate the right mix of skilled temporary migrants to address genuine skill and labour shortages, support rebuilding the economy, and to help manage numbers and pressures on core infrastructure, such as schools, housing, and the health system.” At the same time, New Zealand’s Green List — which offers fast-track residency for in-demand workers — was tightened. “These changes are the start of a more comprehensive work programme to create a smarter immigration system that manages net migration, responds to our changing economic context, attracts top talent, revitalises international education, is self-funding and sustainable, and better manages risk,” Ms Stanford said. New Zealand’s economy has been in the doldrums for the past few years, after its central bank jacked up interest rates at the fastest pace in history in response to post-Covid inflation and record-high house prices. Starting in October 2021, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) raised the official cash rate a dozen times, from a record low 0.25 per cent to 5.5 per cent by May 2023. At the same time, the government rapidly cut off Covid-era economic stimulus, with the double-whammy sending the economy into a spiral. House prices crashed — Auckland and Wellington are now down more than 20 per cent from their 2021 peaks — unemployment skyrocketed and the country entered recession. New Zealand’s unemployment rate is now 5.1 per cent, from 3.4 per cent two years ago. According to HSBC economist Paul Bloxham, New Zealand was the worst performing developed economy last year. The RBNZ has since cut the official cash rate six times since August 2024, reaching 3.25 per cent in May. “Lower interest rates are supporting economic activity. This will create more jobs over time,” the bank said in its announcement last month. “Economic activity declined in the middle of last year but is now recovering. Higher dairy and beef prices are boosting the incomes of farmers. Lower interest rates are encouraging households to spend more and businesses to invest. We expect unemployment to start coming down later this year as the economy recovers and businesses hire more people.” A record 128,700 people, including 80,200 citizens, left the country in 2024, many seeking better economic opportunities in Australia. This exodus has largely contributed to the country’s net migration falls, as it seeks to better target its immigration settings to make up for brain drain of higher-skilled young professionals. OECD economist David Carey, in a 2019 research paper, noted New Zealand’s immigration policies had long been dictated by the need for high-skilled workers to make up for brain drain to Australia, resulting in a “brain exchange”. “Immigration has had small positive effects on GDP per capita and has not adversely affected wage or employment opportunities of the average NZ-born worker,” he wrote. “Temporary migration has had some positive effects on the earnings of New Zealanders 25 years and older, but not of youth. Immigration has also had favourable effects on government finances overall, although not at the local government level.” Mr Carey noted that “on the other hand, infrastructure and housing supply have not kept pace with the demand generated by high net migration, resulting in traffic congestion, water pollution and large increases in house prices, which has redistributed wealth to property owners from non-property owners, who tend to be less well off”. “More research is needed to understand fully the wider wellbeing impacts of immigration on the local population,” he wrote. In Australia, net overseas migration added 340,800 people to the population in 2024 — or 931 new residents per day — according to figures last week from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). That’s down from a peak of 555,800 in the 12 months to September 2023, and net overseas migration of 68,000 in the December 2024 quarter — after falling for five consecutive quarters — was about 7000 lower than Treasury’s forecast due to fewer arrivals. The Albanese government has sought to rein in international student numbers, which make up the lion’s share of Australia’s net overseas migration, by increasing the student visa charge and implementing a range of integrity measures. Still, it was the third consecutive year in which net overseas migration exceeded 300,000 in a single calendar year. The IPA argues the federal government’s “inability to rein in Australia’s unsustainable migration program” has seen the country’s housing shortfall balloon to 179,000 homes. Mr Wild said a sustainable migration strategy must be “properly planned for, with housing and infrastructure already in place before new residents arrive”. “Most importantly, Australia’s migration system should be designed for the maximum benefit of the nation, as well as having the consent of the community, yet this is not the case,” he said. “What Australians are seeing today is the result of poor population policy which is stretching critical social infrastructure like housing, schools, roads, and hospitals. At the same time, it is not delivering the benefits of addressing Australia’s worker shortages, which this surge is predicated on.” He stressed Australians “are, by nature, welcoming and tolerant, and migration has and will always play an important part in the success of Australia”. “However, the federal government has taken advantage of our good nature by overseeing record migration levels without a plan for where and how new arrivals will live,” Mr Wild said.