ACT leader David Seymour says his party "remains pro-immigration" despite proposing a $6 daily surcharge on temporary migrants, an overstayer enforcement unit and new English language requirements for some visa holders.
He acknowledged workers could face large bills under his party's proposed $6 daily charge but said final details were still being finalised including when it would be charged. "We'll release a full manifesto with that level of detail," he said.
The party leader said New Zealand needed a way to fund infrastructure as its population grew by "an amount of people equivalent to Dunedin every couple of years".
Speaking to Q+A, Seymour said he led a pro-immigration party.
"Nothing at all" had changed, he stated. "We remain pro-immigration. We oppose any kind of debate that is a populist bidding war not based on fact."
In 2017, he had criticised a "populist bidding war" on immigration, and in 2020 the party's policy opened by declaring ACT would "continue to be a pro-immigration party".
The party announced a six-point plan including deporting serious offenders no matter how long they have been in the country. (Source: 1News)
He noted the $6 daily charge for visa holders had its roots in his 2017 book, which proposed a daily infrastructure contribution from migrants and visitors to New Zealand.
But ACT's proposed overstayer enforcement unit had not featured in any of the party's previous election platforms.
Seymour said he had since heard from people inside Immigration NZ who said "we don't have the power to do anything" about an estimated 20,000 overstayers in the country.
He said the English language proposal had come from similar feedback.
Seymour said health workers in his electorate were telling him "the amount of time I'm spending trying to get translations and work with people who are in this country entitled to services but can't speak English, this is one of the reasons we have a drag".
"These are people who are pretty pro-migrant, they're not out there with pitchforks."
Stanford appeared after announcing the Government's replacement for NCEA. (Source: Q and A)
Meanwhile, the Government has scrapped English requirements for golden visa holders, who must invest $5 million. Seymour said the distinction came down to scale.
"You're talking about several dozen people versus literally hundreds of thousands."
He added that a citizenship test being developed by the Government would include questions on values including freedom of religion, free speech and the right to vote, as well as scenarios such as who is allowed to report domestic violence.
"Unfortunately, it's possible that some people answering that question will be thinking about it for the first time, and that's why I think it's so important," he said.
Treaty bill 'critical' to cohesion, immigration could test it
Asked whether immigration settings had threatened social cohesion, Seymour said they had "the potential to, but that "listening to people is important."
"When I talk to people who do business in South Auckland, and they say, ‘Look, actually, you know, we don't feel that we can do business easily because we're dealing with people that just play by different rules,’ and I say to them, ‘Look, mate, you've got to ease up here. Look how difficult the rules are to get in. It's almost impossible.’"
On social cohesion, Seymour rejected a comparison with his Treaty Principles Bill, which drew some of the largest protests in New Zealand history and saw the Prime Minister acknowledge it had contributed to worsening Crown-Iwi relations.
"My Treaty Principles Bill promoted social cohesion. Now, I can't be responsible for people who misrepresented it. I can't be responsible for people who, frankly, had other political agendas," Seymour said.
"I think people feel a lot more empowered to say, ‘No, no, no, actually the Treaty did make us all equal; New Zealanders do have equal rights.’ People feel able to say."
He added: "We are all equal, and that is critical to social cohesion in the long term, is that each person feels that they have the same basic rights and dignity."
The legislation was defeated with only ACT supporting it. (Source: 1News)
Seymour rejects criticism of his regulation ministry
Seymour also discussed the Ministry for Regulation's latest report on overlapping regulatory systems. He said the report was designed to build a comprehensive picture of the regulatory landscape rather than propose specific mergers.
The ACT leader rejects comparisons between his ministry and the Productivity Commission, which had been disestablished to partly fund it.
"It's an irrelevant comparison, right? It was also partially funded by moving people over from Treasury. Unsurprisingly, other existing departments recommended against setting up something different, because that's the way bureaucracy works.
"We also have always been open about the fact that we would put additional money into it – so, you know, people trying to run that narrative — it's not credible.
"What it has done, as the third smallest ministry in the government, is return savings to New Zealanders many times greater than what it has cost, and that is the right way to enable it, rather than trying to draw a false equivalence with another thing that wasn't producing anything that we stopped in order to partially fund this one."
The ministry had delivered savings many times its cost through deregulation in areas including industrial hemp, hairdressing and early childhood education, he said.
'I haven't given them a direction': Seymour on RNZ
Seymour also used a subsequent interview with Q+A to defend his public criticism of RNZ, saying he had not directed the public broadcaster despite questioning the appointment of a Morning Report host and the performance of its long-serving CEO.
"I haven't asked them to change it. I know they're not going to change it," he said.
He claimed RNZ's performance had declined under its outgoing chief executive.
"Your trust is down, your ratings are down, your performance has happened under someone that's been there for 13 years, and you've made appointments of people who don't really seem to be in line with the spirit of a public broadcaster," he said.
"If your performance isn't that great, if you make questionable decisions, your shareholders will have something to say. That's the reality for every other business".
He was dismissive of RNZ's digital audience growth, arguing it reflected broader internet trends rather than strong performance, and said he was focused on the fact that the broadcaster had fallen in linear radio ratings against traditional competitors.
Pressed on whether his comments amounted to political interference — given legislation that prevents a responsible minister from directing the public broadcaster — Seymour said even legal experts had only been able to say he had breached "the spirit of the law".
"Which is a way of saying I haven't broken the law, haven't given a direction," he said.
RNZ's board had said external pressure contributed to the early announcement of its CEO's departure last week.
Seymour pushed back on the notion that was him, saying the broadcaster could not claim independence from his remarks while also citing them as a factor.
"They seem to believe that the shareholders who actually fund them, being the taxpayers, have to sit back meekly and have their representative completely muted, masked, and muzzled, while they get on with doing whatever they like," he said.
Seymour rejected the suggestion he was undermining trust in media, saying his comments were a toned-down reflection of what constituents told him regularly.
"When the media just aren't doing their job, and I'm sorry, but by and large they haven't been — that's why you've seen that trust fall off a cliff," he said.
For the full interviews, watch the videos above
Q+A with Jack Tame is made with the support of New Zealand On Air
SHARE ME