John MacDonald: The bit about ACT's immigration policy I don't buy

ACT Leader David Seymour seems to be going all Winston Peters on it, with his party’s new immigration policy. 

There’s stuff in it I think is ok. But there’s one part I don’t think is okay. This ridiculous idea of banning immigrants from getting any sort of benefit until they’ve been here for at least five years. I’ll tell you why shortly. 

But essentially, ACT doesn’t want immigrants getting any sort of free ride. 

It wants people here on temporary work visas to pay for the privilege of being here - charging them $6-a-day to help pay for infrastructure.  

That’s another crazy part of this policy. Federated Farmers is already saying it would just put people off coming here. Which is true. If someone has got a choice of where they go to work, they won’t go somewhere where $42 disappears from their pay each week. As well as the tax they’d already be paying. 

David Seymour also wants us to get tougher on deporting immigrants who commit serious crimes. Which I don’t have a problem with.  

And, he wants people coming here to be better at English - with a higher standard of English required before they’re allowed in. I don’t see any problems with that.  

ACT also wants to set-up a specialised enforcement unit targeting overstayers, which has the Green Party all excited. I heard its immigration spokesperson saying it sounds like ACT wants to set up a New Zealand version of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency in the United States, or ICE, as it’s known. 

I think others are saying too that we already have a unit targeting overstayers. So I'm indifferent on that part of David Seymour's plan.  

But, as I say, the aspect of this policy that I have a real problem with, is banning immigrants from getting any sort of benefit until they’ve been here for at least five years. 

You imagine someone moving to New Zealand, things going ok for the first two-or-three years but, then, they lose their job or get crook. 

They can’t afford to travel back to their home country, so what are we going to do? 

Do we say “Oh sorry mate, get back to us in two or three years - that’s when you’ll be entitled to the unemployment benefit or the sickness benefit or whatever.” 

What happens to that person? They end up on the street probably. And is that what we want?    

Someone’s life spiraling out of control, all for the sake of kicking immigrants off this so-called benefit gravy train some people seem to think people who come here from other countries are on. 

No thanks. And what’s more, we’d deny them a benefit, but they’d still be entitled to ACC. It doesn’t stack up. 

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk zb.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
ACT leader David Seymour. This is my reading of it.
He seems to be going all Winston Peters with his
party's new immigration policy. Now, the stuff in it I
think's okay, but there's one part in particular I don't
think is okay, and I'm keen to see what you
make of it. It's this ridiculous idea of banning immigrants

(00:34):
from getting any sort of benefit until they've been here
for at least five years. I'll tell you why I
don't like it in a second, But essentially ACT doesn't
want immigrants getting any sort of free ride. It wants
people here on temporary work visas to pay for the
privilege of being here, charging them six bucks a day
to help pay for infrastructure. I mean, that's another crazy

(00:56):
part of this policy, isn't it. You might have heard
the guy from Federated Farmers saying to Mike this morning
that it would just prought people off coming here, which
is true. I mean, if someone's got a choice of
where they go to work, they won't go somewhere where
forty two dollars disappears from their pay each week, as
well as a tax they'd already be paying, So that's

(01:17):
a dark idea. David Seymour also wants us to get
tougher on deporting immigrants who commit serious crimes. I don't
have a problem with that. Who would He wants people
coming here to be better at English, with a high
higher standard of English required before they're allowed in. I
didn't see any problems with that. ACT also wants to

(01:38):
set up a specialized enforcement unit targeting over stays, which
has the Green Party all excited. I saw its immigration
spokesperson on the news last night saying it sounds like
sounds like ACT wants to set up in his Zell
version of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency in the States,
or ICE as it's known. I think others are saying

(02:01):
too that we already have a unit targeting overstairs. So
I'm actually indifferent on that part of David Seymore's plan.
But as I say, the aspect of this policy that
I have a real problem with is this idea of
banning immigrants from getting any sort of benefit until they've
been here for at least five years. You imagine someone
moving here all right, and things going okay for the

(02:22):
first two or three years, but then they either lose
their job or they get crooked and they can't afford
to travel back to their home country. So what are
we going to do. Do we say to them, Oh, sorry, mate, sorry, sorry,
get back to us in two or three years. Once
you've been here for five, that's when you'll be entitled
to the unemployment benefit or the sickness benefit or whatever.

(02:46):
We're going to say that to them, or David Seymour
thinks we should. And then what happens to that person, Well,
they end up on the street. Probably that is that
what we want, someone's life spiraling out of control, all
for the sake of kicking immigrants off the so called
gravy train. Some people seem to think people who come
here from the countries are on no thanks, and what's more,

(03:10):
we deny them a benefit, but they still be entitled
to acc doesn't stack up, now, David Seymour says, actors,
all four people coming here as long as they have
shared values, whatever the hell that means, and as long
as they quote play by the rules. Now they're playing
by the rules. But fine, yep, but there's no way

(03:31):
I want New Zealand to become a country which says
to people, you're welcome to come here until you become
a burden and then we don't want to know you.
That's hasn't got my tick. But how do you feel
about acts immigration crackdown and in particular, what do you
think of its policy not to let immigrants claim any

(03:52):
sort of benefit until they've been here for five years?
What do you think of that approach?

Speaker 1 (03:57):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks It'd be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio