At a time when it seems like our immigration policies have been in the spotlight again in recent weeks, and senior Immigration New Zealand officials are undertaking desperately-needed reviews of key visa products —particularly the Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV) scheme and the Skilled Migrant Residence category—the opportunity to create a more agile and balanced system has never been more important. As far back as 2005, when then-Immigration Minister David Cunliffe stated that New Zealand was “in a global race for talent and we must win our share”, we have had to think strategically about creating robust immigration policy in order to attract talented people to our little corner of the world. Nearly 20 years on from when the briefing process began to amend the 1987 Immigration Act to the 2009 version we have today, the ongoing need for flexible, streamlined immigration policy that responds to both economic demands and social realities remains just as important.

For New Zealand’s workforce, businesses, and society, there is hope that reviews of the Accredited Employer work visa scheme and the Skilled Migrant Category will bring forth more agile and well-balanced policies — most importantly, an approach that evolves with the country’s continuously shifting needs while also addressing long-standing issues.

The Need for Simplicity in the Accredited Employer Work Visa Scheme

The AEWV scheme was introduced with the intent to safeguard the employment of overseas workers in New Zealand, yet its current structure is incredibly complex and burdensome for both employers and migrants. If the goal is to ensure that employers can address genuine skill shortages, then the system needs to be simplified – both in terms of the policy being applied and the visa processing system itself. Getting the balance right would mean that we have policy that is robust enough to prevent migrant exploitation and displacement of New Zealand workers but flexible enough to allow employers to fill truly legitimate skill gaps, and an efficient visa processing system that can really differentiate applications that are going to lead to the former versus those that will satisfy the latter.

Right now, the complexity in obtaining accreditation followed by the Job Check followed by the AEWV & the inconsistently applied policy across all 3 gateways is a disincentive to employers, often resulting in frustrating delays in meeting labour demands.

Any adjustments currently being considered should aim to reduce administrative hurdles, allowing employers easier access to the skills they genuinely need to address talent shortages. Such flexibility, however, must be thoughtfully implemented – immigration policy has the power to shape not only the workforce but also the economy, society, and local communities—and it needs to be implemented wisely, and by officials who have a bit of ‘real-world knowledge’ of how the economy and labour market actually work.

Rethinking the Skilled Migrant Residence Category

When a points-based Residence category was first introduced more than 30 years ago, it offered a newly flexible approach of a pathway to Residence to a range of skilled workers who were looking to bring unique expertise to New Zealand. The face of the points-based system has changed over time and, in contrast to the (perhaps overly flexible) system introduced in the ‘90s, the newer ‘simplified’ 6-point Skilled Migrant Category system (introduced in October last year) is too restrictive, and as such, is probably inadvertently limiting New Zealand’s access to crucial talent – the talent that the objective of the Skilled Migrant Category is to attract.

Any review of the Skilled Migrant Category (apparently set to begin in early 2025) needs to consider how to better reflect the diversity of skills and experiences needed across various sectors, not just those that are “highly paid” or require occupational registration. Keeping such a narrow definition of who qualifies as a skilled migrant means that New Zealand risks excluding genuinely skilled professionals who could greatly benefit the workforce, and who will go elsewhere if the door to Residence remains as firmly shut as it has been since at least the latter half of 2023.

The Risks of Reactionary Policy-Making on Net Migration

We are a nation built on immigration and our economy still relies on filling our skill gaps with talent from migrants, yet it’s undeniable that immigration levels do need to be managed in order to prevent excessive strain on things like housing, health services, and transport infrastructure. The key word there is ‘managed’ – not restricted, not cut, not reduced.

When immigration policy is shaped by short-term considerations—such as focusing solely on rapidly cutting net migration —longer-term consequences are lurking right around the corner. Addressing the challenges of genuine skilled labour shortages requires a pragmatic approach, with foresight and flexibility as key ingredients, rather than knee-jerk reactions that may only provide temporary and short-term solutions.

A Call for Pragmatic, Long-Term Immigration Policy

By fostering flexible, well-considered immigration policy, we can avoid short-sighted decisions that merely fill temporary gaps and instead build a long-term strategic framework that is agile enough to face changes as time goes by.

As the experts in Wellington work on refining New Zealand’s immigration policy, there is hope that they will take a forward-looking and pragmatic approach. Meaningful change could be achieved by:

1. Simplifying and streamlining the AEWV process to remove excessive red tape, enabling employers to access skilled workers without undue burden, while ensuring local labour standards are protected.
2. Prioritize policy stability over reactionary changes to ensure that labour and skills supply remains consistent. No more reactionary ‘turn the tap on, turn the tap off’ approaches, but also balance that with agility to flex as the labour market flexes and changes.
3. Broaden the Skilled Migrant Category criteria to capture a wider range of talents, ensuring that New Zealand doesn’t lose out on valuable contributions from skilled workers who fall outside the current narrow definitions.
4. Consider not only the type of skilled individuals needed but also where they’re most needed – as well as prioritising attracting people with the skills and experiences that align with our skill gaps and economic aspirations, regionally-focused strategies can help direct incoming talent to areas where population growth would be most beneficial, addressing local shortages and balancing national growth. I believe that using immigration policy to incentivise migrants to settle in the regions, instead of Auckland, is an opportunity we’re missing out on with current policy settings.

5. Streamlining immigration processes without compromising on the essential checks – strip the process back & filter out any wasted process steps, but balance that with ensuring integrity and checks on what truly needs scrutinising. Immigration New Zealand used to have a strong commitment to continuous improvement practices across all their processing sites (circa 2014) and I would love to see a return to this mindset, with a goal of having processing timeframes within the realm of what customers would deem acceptable.

Agile, balanced immigration policy requires more than just plugging gaps—it requires well-thought-out, future-focused strategies. And rather than fixating on an arbitrary “migration number”, which will never be static, policy needs to be flexible and able to respond to factors like workforce demand, economic conditions, and the capacity of infrastructure, which are always changing over time.

It’s clear that many migrants and employers are eager for changes to happen swiftly (judging by the emails and online messages I receive on a daily basis, asking when things are going to change). Understandably, the current wait for any meaningful change is frustrating for those wanting to secure their future here. However, developing thoughtful, balanced policy takes time. Rushing changes without thorough consideration risks creating unintended consequences and leaving us in no better a position than we are in right now.

That said, we must also recognize the urgency. New Zealand cannot afford to lose talented individuals to other countries that are more proactive with changes to their immigration policies. There’s a delicate balance between careful policy development and timely implementation. Ultimately, sensible and pragmatic immigration policies will be worth the wait—if we act quickly enough to keep New Zealand competitive and welcoming for the skilled migrants we need.