Statistics NZ estimates New Zealand's net migration gain increased 1% in the June year compared to the previous year to 49,427

Statistics NZ estimates New Zealand's net migration gain increased 1% in the June year compared to the previous year to 49,427

Statistics NZ estimates New Zealand experienced a net population gain from migration of 49,427 in the 12 months to June.

That was up 1.0%, or 509, from the net gain of 48,918 in the previous 12 months, but well below the gains of between 53,243 in the 12 months to June 2015 and 58,688 in the 12 months to June 2017, with a peak of 63,834 in the 12 months to June 2016.

The latest gain of 49,427 was the result of 145,292 new long term arrivals and 95,866 long term departures.

The reduction in the net gain has mainly been driven by more people leaving the country long term, which has steadily risen for the last three years, while long term arrivals have remained near their June year 2016 peak of 145,831 for the last three years.

There was a net loss of 13,427 New Zealand citizens in the 12 months to June, almost double the net loss of 6881 in the previous 12 months.

Conversely there was a net gain of 62,583 non-New Zealand citizens in the 12 months to June, up 12.6% compared to the previous 12 months.

The biggest source country for new migrants remains China, with 10,055 long term arrivals from that country in the 12 months to June, up 31.9% compared to the previous 12 months.

That was followed by 8465 people from South Africa +54.8%, which is now the second biggest source country for new migrants, relegating India to third position with 8416 arrivals -12.3%, and 6805 from the Philippines -14.2%.

By visa type, the biggest single group were Australian and New Zealand citizens with 43,318 long term arrivals, followed by 31,868 on work visas, 30,381 visitor visas, 25,585 student visas 12,929 residency visas.

The comment stream on this story is now closed.

Net long term migration

Select chart tabs »

The ' Net long term migration - annual 12-16' chart will be drawn here.
The 'Net long term migration monthly gain or loss 12-16' chart will be drawn here.


We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.


Let the monthly mud throwing game begin!!!


This is getting serious. How will Uber get enough drivers if our "Very Highly" skilled migrant numbers drop much more?

If anyone knows party people in Labour or NZF, they should forward them the comment thread below. Explain it is a step or two above a Stuff comment thread.

Many interested and engaged members of the public voted Labour solely for: stop the housing sell off to foreign interests, and reduce the large and sudden population increase in Auckland. One delivered, the other was bare faced populism, or just a lie? Voters will remember come election time.


Labour said they would get numbers down to 20'000. I voted labour. I was lied to. I will never vote for Jacinda ever again. Why do politicians not do what they say they will do?


Many of us feel the same way, making a nonsense out of democracy. If reasonable politicians won't listen to the people, they will vote for unreasonable politicians.


And then, one day as if for no reason at all Trump became president.


I have to admit, I too voted Labour for the first time in my life largely because of their promise to reduce immigration numbers. They have taken almost no action, and any reduction has come naturally. I feel very let down.


This was a big issue at the last election and there has been no action from any party.
Why is WP so quiet on this?
Seems there is no choice if you think immigration is putting pressure on infrastructure and needs toning down for a while.


Winston is saying and doing nothing because he's a conman and a liar.

He did the same in 2003.

But people are stupid and have short memories.

When the new government took office some dudes from treasury probably said something like... look guys, foreign buyers are out and that means several billion less aggregate demand in the economy. If you want to run a surplus, and lower immigration then go right ahead but you should know that will certainly crash the economy!

If you don't like the Government's policy be sure to write to/e-mail your MP and/or the responsible minister to ask for an explanation. This is the best way to show your displeasure on an issue, sometimes even more powerful than complaining on an internet forum.

So you said you voted Labour, and now you say you'll not vote for Jacinda Ardern. Are you in the Mt Albert electorate?


I'm disappointed too. On the other hand, show me a politician who doesn't lie and isn't completely nuts. It's not like there's a better alternative here, unfortunately.


To be honest is not fair just to be pissed off with the coalition because immigration numbers haven’t reduced!
They haven’t actually achieved anything that they said they would, in fact their record of performance is now just pathetic.
The year of delivering BS.

TM2, I'd have thought for you; higher migration = higher demand for houses and rentals = growing CHCH = money money money..

But they're waging a "War On Landlords"!

Rents across the country are still rising much faster than both wages and CPI.
Government intervention may have something to do with it but the rental hikes are largely due to low new additions to existing rental stock in NZ despite high population growth.

Costs everywhere seem to be rising faster than incomes. I've heard it suggested we're hitting deflation.

I want to believe that the reduction in temporary migration from its peak levels since 2017 is a result of Labour's intervention. However, the massive build-up of visa applications on hand in recent months, particularly of applicants from the subcontinent, suggests they've simply slowed down the approval process to reveal reduced numbers.

I fear you are right - everything at INZ has slowed down. It hurts deserving immigrants (for example a father of a NZ child born in NZ with a NZ mother is still waiting for his application ofr residency to be considered ie assigned to a case officer - it was submitted 6 months ago). It means NZ exporting businesses are delayed getting the highly technical skills that they are willing to pay large salaries for. So NZ loses the best to other countries and we get those who are willing to hang on for months and years.


Agree. I voted National because JK said he would do something about the housing crisis, didn't realise he meant he would pour petrol on it. I'll never vote National again either, unfortunately who are we left with?

Maybe the greens? But unbelievably they want more people in the country which will put even more pressure on the environment and add more pollution? The greens are becoming schizophrenic! they are struggling to be nice to everything and not realising that their la la land dreamtime world does not and cannot actually exist.

The Greens are even worse on immigration. If the Greens actually focused on sensible policy for protecting our environment, I would strongly consider them. At the moment they seem to be focusing on social policy equally, most of which is not appealing to me in the slightest.

I can't find any policy on their website as to population levels or immigration. Someone got a link?

Here's Golriz, their immigration spokesperson, saying anyone who wants to come here should be able to.


How absurd. As if the people who live in a place should have no say.

Alas that seems to be the very thing that has happened.

RS, That’s pretty much what Maori have been saying since the 1800s

"they want more people in the country"
Can you point me to a policy or an interview where they state this?

That link was what caused me to not vote Green 2 years ago. All the evidence is money does more good spent in the refugee camps where 30 people are helped for the cost of one refugee coming to NZ. This link shows they are more interested in a photo opportunity than actually helping refugees. Our refugees should be only those who have desperate medical conditions that cannot be treated in the camps.

Selfishly I'd rather prospective refugees get hand-picked for the betterment of the country as a whole rather than NZ being a dumping ground for whoever the UN deems we should be grateful to receive.

Judging by some of the reported incidents involving refugees we do seem to get more than our share with mental health issues. But I could be wrong ~ how they are selected other than they are approved by UNHCR seems to be a bit of a secret. That gave me concern when I read that in Lebanon many Christian and Yazidi had been too terrified to register at refugee camps that were predominately muslim. It would be better if it was more transparent.

Thanks, I didn't know about this (didn't vote Green either). I thought this was about the 1000 refugees vs 500. But 5000 is insane.

But that was about refugees. I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the 50 or 60k others we are allowing in.

The Greens want more immigration? That would be the height of hypocrisy, wouldn't it? More immigration would mean more population.
The great guru himself, Sir Richard Attenborough, has said that without population control we are heading for disaster. He has said that unless humans control their population nature will fight back; he cites Ethiopia: Too many people for too little land. Attenborough more or less says that over-population is the greatest threat to mankind and all the other ills such as global warming, etc are secondary to that.
So, let's hear from a greenie on this one. And what about that demographic which have more children than they can support; do the Greens support this too?

India has a population that has increased much faster than China with its one child policy. China is still rather poor per capita compared to NZ, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan but it is wealthier than India despite India probably having more western aid and democracy and more wealth and less turmoil in the fifties. I blame over population.

More immigration doesn't increase the global population... It increases the population in New Zealand, one of the least population dense countries in the world.

Oddly, we are part of the world, our hauling people in hand over fist, does not send a message that the world needs fewer of us, not more

What does Sir David say?

National based their economic numbers on immigration. They are likely to do the same if they get in power again, because damn it worked last time and the value of their houses shot up.

With the worm turning downward again, Labour/NZ First maybe a lot better than National if that is what your vote is based on.

Jacinda is in the Parliamentarians for Global Action "club". I assume she doesn't care about national sovereignty?

Foreign Buyer,

Your faith in the veracityof politicians seeking office is touching,but more than a little naive,don’t you think? Can you name a party than doesn’t offer heaven and earth to get elected and then fail to deliver much of what they promised?

I would love to know who will suck you in next year.

Labour said 20-30000 less, Winston said 10000 total. No follow-through by either - just words mouthed to get elected.

Personally I think current immigration levels are OK, given near record low unemployment.

Labour and NZF have really missed the boat (or worse - just don't care) that a lot of swing voters wanted the National Govt immigration fire hose better controlled and thus voted for their promises of reductions in immigration. The swing voters will simply not put up with the other liberal BS without this promise actually being delivered. Picking an absolute rout back to blue at the next election unless there is radical change on this area.

We need more people, but the speed that its happening is crippling Auckland. The infrastructure needs ten years of solid spending to have any chance of catching up. Natural born Kiwis are fleeing in response and that is putting pressure elsewhere - que Tauranga.

Simply cant recall any policy from anyone that said NZ need another million people in it, which is whats happened in AKL in the last half century.

What is a natural born Kiwi? As opposed to some sort of un-natural born one from a host animal of some description?


There are too many people wanting to be offended nowadays. People are getting sick of it!

Political correctness in a manifestation of a lack of self esteem. Not everybody will love you.

“We need more people”
Where is the justification? Or are you just spouting the holy mantra of the immigration consultants.
It needs a very high qualification to overcome the inherent drag on infrastructure, housing, health and education services to make that one fly.
In fact had we had a lot less immigrants over the last 20 years, everyone here already would be much better off.
All IMVHO, of course

Im all for 10-20k a year but carefully selected in required areas. With out aging population many are retiring. Big shortages in health and IT for example. Most of our home growns go ti Aussie for higher wages and lower house prices.

We need more people? What for? Is it too build the infrastructure for all the people we've imported?

To keep cheap restaurants staffed with easily exploited workers. If we didn't allow cafe and restaurant workers as "skilled" migrants we might have to pay restaurant workers more, or we might have to eat at home more.

We need more courier drivers.I ordered an item from Auckland an hour ago.It hasn't even begun its journey down SH1. .,cannot wait,it's killing me.
May arrive tommorrow,oh no i need it now.

Why dont you go get it

Auckland transport infrastructure cannot and will not be fixed in your working lifetime. Just look at the glacial pace of projects and dire state of Auckland Council's finances. Only going to get worse unless a technological revolution occurs (autonomous cars or tunnels or chape air taxis or all commuters switching to quad-bike sized micro-cars to double road capacity might do it).

Governments should focus more on improving the quality of migrants coming to NZ if they are serious about improving the well-being of the nation.
We still dish out thousands of permanent visas to low-paid migrants who work in areas that do not feature on our skill shortage lists.

The minimum wage threshold for those applying permanent visas is pegged to the median wage currently at $25/hr. Further, an employer can sponsor a "talented" employee for a permanent visa by paying them 55k a year.

You say quality matters and so did Matthew Tukaki and he got accused of xenophobic dog-whistling and was told to learn more Maori history.

INZ's idea of a 'skill' is very different from that of the average person in the street - it included chef, retail manager, baker, tourist guide. The only rational definition is what will an employer pay. The skilled visa category should be done by dutch auction - at least that would optimise govt revenue.

To throw some positivity in the mix, net migration is considerably down from the peak of about 70k. A fair chunk of the remaining high immigration is due to a significant uptick in people coming from South Africa. We've had several highly skilled employees join us from SA in our office in the construction sector. They are kind of refugees from the turmoil in their country. So there's a lot of good coming from it.


Cultural similarity is a subject that doesn't get much airtime these days. Do we really want people from countries with different traditions from ours, particularly ones where the government considers all past and present citizens as state property? Isn't that what David Goldman at Asia Times calls cultural suicide? Personally I'm much happier about people from countries like India, Hong Kong, Malaya, Thailand and South Africa where there is more of a shared understanding of what creates a civilised society.

In my more outrageous moments I have also suggested, only partly in jest, that we should severely restrict immigration of ex government employees from all countries, especially Great Britain, lest they infect us with their socially destructive ideas. I mean, we have enough of those of our own to sort out, we don't need any more.

Lastly, and most outrageously, perhaps we should favour people from constitutional monarchies. I know it seems outrageous, but the most civilised countries tend to have this system, the only republic consistently in the top ten being Switzerland, champions of direct democracy by referenda. Republics seem to have a nasty tendency to become oligarchies. Search for top ten most civilised countries and see what you get.

Isn't UK a Constitutional Monarchy ?

Yes. The UK political tradition seems to have two well springs: the Roman command and control system, ie what the rulers of Church and State say is right, is right by definition: and the Danelaw system that requires approval from the populace that it is fair and reasonable. My unfair jibe at ex government employees is based on the failed ideas they might infect us with, such things as Town and Country Planning, which we have resurrected, even though the RMA was meant to kill it once and for all. It is the institutionalising effects of working for government, not the people themselves, who are but victims of the process.

The subtle problem is, if you have been trained in a command and control system all your life, at school and at work, you end up only advocating for command and control solutions, just with someone else calling the shots.

The Brits exported English and the system of government (and their style of civil servants and administrators, etc) to many countries. The former has proved very useful, the latter not so much as time has proved.

The graph above shows it peaked at 64k in 2016, and was down to 55k at election in 2017. Never 70k. Turns out that at the time the stats were highly inaccurate (recently corrected)

It's also good that we're now starting to track important societal and economic statistics more rigorously.

You don't remember how badly Shaw managed the census last year then?

How long ago did Stats NZ start the effort to change their methodology?

Agreed. In my opinion the men and women from SA, whom I've had dealings with, are hard working, speak English and love their rugby.

problems under national's open door policy still coming up, they need to be careful about the process and make sure good people are allowed in before people that will pay extra
Marja Lubeck: Can the Minister provide an example of the importance of Immigration New Zealand's greater focus on risk management and verification?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Yes. An example is the case of 47 cases of fraudulent financial documentation relating to a number of Vietnamese visa applications where Immigration New Zealand is currently taking action. In relation to Vietnam, Immigration New Zealand and Education New Zealand have agreed to an industry agent engagement programme to grow high-quality student enrolments and deter fraud.

Should we be surprised? From personal experience, many documents including police checks, academic records, government documents, "chefs" training certificates, etc in Vietnam can be "bought" for the right price. It is a one party authoritarian state which thrives on corruption. It is a reality that a proportion of Vietnamese immigrants get here on fraudulent grounds and continue with complete disregard for or wilful ignorance of the NZ legal system until caught (tax avoidance, disregard of NZ employment law, sponsoring friends/relatives/foreign workers as cheap labour for restaurants/nail salons, fake marriages, etc). Significant contributors include immigration policy failure, weak enforcement of immigration law, and the international student/visa mill industry.


Can anyone point me to an interview where Jacinda has actually been questioned on this abstract failure to reduce levels of immigration? I feel like the topic is being completely ignored and it is the main topic which got her elected?

Winson't whole platform is about reducing immigration.

And he has done nothing.

And the blue rinse brigade will vote for him again.

Winston should be calling a referendum on Immigration rather than on Abortion. May get him more votes and push him above 5 %.

No it won't, because of the obvious questions he will be asked i.e. "Why have you done zilch on immigration in the last 2 years?"

Winston, has moderated the extreme decisions of labour and the greens using veto power.

Ain't you a foreigner to NZ?

Why are you so upset


Sorry DGM but If my user name was spiderman it would not mean I am actually spiderman.............. You do know that though I'm sure?


I'm a foreigner (been living here for 4 years) and I'm upset that while I had to jump through hoops and spend thousands of dollars on applications, translations and collecting all the evidence of my education and professional career (which I'm actually OK with), there are seemingly hordes of immigrants imported who barely speak English and end up working as dairy managers or fast food joint employees. How did those people even get accepted?
There is a shortage of people in highly productive sectors (such as senior IT staff), but is there really a shortage of people who can flip burgers? That's typically a job students, unskilled workers and financially stressed people do. Is there a shortage of such people in NZ?


I was a foreigner (been living here for 16 years), now a citizen. Everything you say applied in 2003 too - only difference in 2003 were the traffic jams were shorter and we didn't have Kiwis living in garages and cars and motels.


True. Kiwi-born as well as expats in NZ are largely in support of skilled and humanitarian migration but at sustainable levels.

I am an expat too but would like to see migration brought down to a pace where we can catch up on our infrastructure and housing backlogs. We also do not want migrants to face a hard time integrating into the society, like those migrating to the US historically have had. Therefore, a sustainable pace, obviously lower than the current rate, is win-win for everyone, including future migrants.

Rapidly dropping the living standards of the majority while a select few gain more on their housing stock or unproductive business activities is absolutely senseless.

Well put.

Yeah the media seem to be MIA on this

Yeah the media seem to be MIA on this


It's intensely frustrating, and an indictment on our media.

Basically if anyone says anything remotely bad against immigration on a main media programme, thye get called xenophobic. For the most astonishing example of that see the Maori Cuncil leader who got called xenophobia a week or so ago on Breakfast, for having the aduactiy to suggest that high levels of immigration had contributed to the housing crisis.

If any journalist questioned Jacinda about her failure to lower immgiration, they would have claims of racism levelled against them, which in the bubble world of NZ media, is a death sentence.

Truly pathetic. No wonder no one trusts the media anymore.

Jack Tame. Enough said.

Another centre right lightweight

Brainless shouting down of any disagreement.

I thought the dog whistle (silent message) was from Jehan Casinader to his parents saying thank you to them for succeeding in immigrating and then adapting to NZ's culture and climate. Most immigrants I meet in Auckland would prefer the numbers to go down and that includes their own country of origin. Never met one who praised INZ for its competance.

Some will say increased immigration will increase housing demand and house prices. Actually I think it has the opposite effect as it puts downward pressure on wages.

Right now increased immigration is the only tool the govt has to keep the economy afloat. Another is income tax cuts which is definitely not an option for a Labour Govt.

While I think it's a nonsense to blame the govt for the weak economy, I do think they are doing quite a poor job on many fronts, including on immigration.

Building consents are at a 45 year high, if there were no extra workers how do you think those places will be built?

We are fully aware since the GFC, construction worker numbers dwindled.. so we cant magically acquire workers without importing them?

Workers to build for all the people we've imported. Seems to me there was an easier way to do this

construction industry in NZ is about 5% of GDP, maybe 5% of workforce. You don't need to import that many builders to have a big impact on its capacity, so that is a sensible response to an under-supply of building capacity.

Yes, but what we got was 100,000 Chinese Chefs!

Oh I dunno mate, same way we got it done 45 years ago where there were about 2m fewer people?

Shouldn't we be targeting those skills specifically instead of keeping an open door for anyone willing to pay international tuition fee for a random qualification?

How does importing retail and cafe workers boost construction though?

I am not against immigration of the people we really really need in areas of pressing skills shortages.
I'm against indiscriminate, mass immigration.

Immigration up = GDP up.
Immigration down = GDP down

Yep. And the moment the GDP growth goes below the expected 3% or so, National will jump on it. "This guvment ruined the economy! We told ya!"
It will be interesting to ask my National supporter colleagues which Labour policies they think caused the economy to "tank".

Off the top of my head: Killing oil and gas on a whim, Increased taxes, more onorous employment laws, many many billions in low quality spending (free 1st year tertiary, NZF provincial growth fund, embassy spend up, kiwibuild, billion trees), huge growth in public spending and civil servant headcount, increased strike action, failure to address woeful infrastructure issues - cancelling motorways all over the place due to Greens, terrible foreign relations management (needlessly annoying US, Australia, China... leading to worse treatment), endless govt sniping at agricultural industry. And continuous demonstrations of incompetence from the Govt (like kiwbuild). All of which are highly off-putting to business owners thinking of expanding, they sensibly don't trust the government and are curtailing investment and tanking economy as a result.

Immigration up = GDP per capita dropping compared to remainder of OECD
Immigration up = productivity per capita stationary for last 5 years (putting NZ about 40% behind leading OECD countries)
Immigration down = GDP less up.
Immigration effectively zero = GDP flat or down.
Immigration < Emigration = GDP down, house prices down

Since the average voter doesn't care about the difference between GDP and GDP per capita, the "immigration up" seems to be the safest bet.

Sadly true.

To sum it up, NZ has been lack of long-term strategy on immigration. Either side of the political spectrum has been very short-sighted and using immigration for their short-term political gains. It hurts both kiwis and new immigrants.

Why would they reduce immigration now when housing sales are dropping dramatically, the housing shortage is questionable, the reserve bank isn’t sure why the housing market isn’t rising more (duh), we’re heading for negative interest rates, and the construction industry needs to stay afloat at all costs?

Because every new mouth demands to be fed from the same diminishing trough.

If the immigrants are wealthy and/or well paid then house prices will go up. More burger flippers has a mild effect on increasing rents in overcrowded properties.
Well paid immigrant = good.
Poorly paid immigrants = bad + rorts and corruption.

Why are you lot so anti immigration? It can't be the housing price issue given that the link shown in this graph is apparently correlation not causation ( ), and house prices are certainly about to fall off a cliff. Also, I've been told on this site many times that there is actually a surplus of houses in Auckland. Surely the traffic can't upset you this much?

We've got very low unemployment, so I'm not against current levels. Never come across an immigrant I didn't like, other than Julie Ann Genter and Golriz Ghahraman.

Never met any of these then:
Do you live in the woods by any chance?

Do you have crime stats for immigrants? I'm pretty sure they have much lower levels of criminality than native born New Zealanders and are under-represented in the prison population.

yup points-systems migrants tend to be high quality. But coat tailers can be pretty bad. I've seen a few cases of South Africans and Zimbabweans emigrating to NZ, bringing in no-hoper bludging/criminal relatives and then departing for Australia to get away from them, leaving NZ to carry the can.

I know quite a few Saffas. All of them earning $120K + as engineers, quantity surveyors etc. Again, can't remember meeting one I didn't like. And this one is hilarious

Yeah I like them too - couple of good mates are Saffas, great work ethic. But I have seen some bad ones too.

Permanent residency latest from
2017/18 - 37,947
2018/19 - 34,476
INZ immigration year ends in June. Reduction of 9.1%. To achieve Labour's target of 25,000 will take four years so vote Labour.
Even at 25,000pa NZ will retain its status of having one of the highest rates of legal immigration in the world.

Thanks for pulling these numbers - if nothing else it's at least trending in the right direction.

And in some respects, these stats ultimately is where the rubber meets the road.

Immigration artificially pumps up the economy don't you know. People buy stuff, houses, cars, food you name it. Labour got in with lies knowing that this was a hot topic and the majority wanted change.

There’s a lot of anti-immigration sentiment here. I can see how Trump became president and I really, really hope went don’t get an equivalent here.


What on earth has Trump got to do with what’s been expressed here? We don’t want these numbers of people coming here plain and simple as it’s very clear to see it’s ruining NZ at an alarming rate.

How is it "ruining NZ at an alarming rate"?

Holding low wages down. Discouraging training and investment in business.

Creating a NZ society where it is common to hear "there are jobs Kiwis will not do so we need immigrants (e.g. bus drivers, care-givers)" but those jobs are done in Norway, Denmark, Switzerland which are all wealthier than us. [My protestant work ethic is offended].

Yes - those jobs are done in there - by immigrants mostly. Where is your protestant sense of reality ?

Foreign Born population
New Zealand 25.1%
Norway 13.8%
Denmark 9.0%
UK 13.2%
USA 14.3%

Nicely done leaving out Switzerland, which has 28.9%.

Yes I did leave it out. I was surprised by that figure - it costs a lot to buy into Swiss citizenship. Judging by a few days holiday in Switzerland last year all the mundane jobs such as selling food at their cheapest restaurants, shopping, tourist bureau, railway staff appeared to be done by well paid locals (of course they might have been Germans or French my ability with languages being insufficient to detect regional accents - but I doubt it). The impression I was left with was that Switzerland is very expensive but its low paid workers are paid multiples of the NZ wage. You can tell that they have minimal low wages because all cars seem to be new and we couldn't find any cheap clothing stores. Basically I was impressed by Switzerland - I think they use immigration more wisely than NZ.

I'd say that a very different sort of immigrant moves to Switzerland, people like Tina Turner, Phil Collins etc

How do you mean ruining? Environmentally? Socially? Economically? I read the other day that the European population in NZ increased from 100,000 to 600,000 in just 20 years in the late 1800s. Now THAT was some fast and unwanted immigration by the people already here.

Ok Voiceofreason, so if something is done wrongly once, we should repeat that wrong over and over because it has already been done? What a good idea? No wonder we are where we are!

Foreign buyer, wait, are you a foreign buyer or is the name ironic? Or foreign buyer in another country?

To compare the 1800s and our century you need to separate the children of immigrants. The europeans in the 1800s had enormous families so maybe most of that 500,000 were born here. Admittedly it made little difference to native Maori.
The immigration figures are not including children born here (for example I have 2 NZ born grandchildren who both appear to be PIs but are recorded as Kiwis).
But your point remains because that was an increase in half a million Europeans as the Maori population dropped to only 45,000.
Some immigration is good. The first europeans were welcomed by the Maori.

Can I be pro-immigration but anti low-wage immigration and its associated rorts?

Didn't Trump succeed because there was no balanced rational discussion of immigration in the USA? So take the sensible comments above and drop out any blatant racist ones and we have the basis for a debate. Which is merely what Matthew Tukaki wanted.

Voiceoftreason it's not immigration that's the problem but rather the number of immigrants and consequently the lack of integration into NZ society. For example Auckland Council requiring Asian shop owners to place english signs on shop fronts.
In your case this quote might ring true "The affinity for multiculturalism is equal to the distance they live from it" - anonymous.

Winston Peters - pre-election:

His message to voters who want a big drop in immigration levels is that Labour can't be trusted, given they had only recently called for sizeable cuts, and National will continue the "economic treason" of "mass immigration".

So now who is continuing to commit economic treason Winnie?

This is disconcerting.
Those numbers are too high. The fabric of New Zealand society is changing.

The reason immigrants want to come here is to experience New Zealand culture which ironically is being eroding away by high levels of immigration.

Swap out Kiwis with large numbers of immigrants, will it be the same country?

Is there any NZ media entity willing to call out the politicians on these numbers?

Political correctness stiffels honest discussion.

The economy is addicted to immigration don't you know? TheNZ Initiative stated several years ago that NZ needed a significant rise in population to sustain a vibrant internal population which is neolib speak for import people to sell houses too...which is precisely where we stand today. Its all about real estate the biggest show in town and who has the cajones to mess with that when your taxation stream depends on it? I might as well change my name to gurdup...

Over 100 comments about those who are arriving - their value and their numbers. Maybe the big story is the doubling of the number of NZ residents who are leaving. Are they disappointed immigrants? Are they highly qualified native born Kiwis leaving for somewhere they are better paid and can afford to buy a house? Are they immigrants who deliberately used NZ as a stepping stone to somewhere else?

I'm generally a fan of immigrants especially the beautiful and handsome ones. Its how the impact has been mismanaged that is the problem, I think. Every immigrant I have befreinded has straight up told me that the longterm goal is Australia and that they only moved to NZ because they couldn't get into the UK, Europe or the USA. No doubt in my mind we are being used as a side door for that purpose. Virtually all my cohort have left NZ in the early naughties and not come back. I am actively considering several offers of mariage for visa, might as well make something out of this whole fiasco...

Labour/NZF election platform of slashing immigration and building 100,000 KB homes must go down as an EPIC FAILURE !!!!! We were CONNED They lied and bullshitted their way in, out they go next time !

Yeah but we elected them to replace the previous lot of liers and bullshitters. We're clean out of replacements in that case!

Stabilise New Zealand's population and we solve our environmental problem entirely. We can't solve the world's problem with that, but nothing we can do will.
Also a stable population has huge benefits economically.

Despite all my comments arguing for reducing the numbers of immigrants I wouldn't go so far as to say 'huge benefits economically'. Firstly much depends on the net immigration - we could pay Kiwis to leave while maintaining our high level of immigration and the result would be a stable population. A stop in immigration is just about impossible - every year Kiwis fall in love and marry foreigners and bring them to NZ - that is about 10,000 and then we have signed agreements to bring in refugees. However if we killed off the work visas and stopped the so called 'skilled' visas then immigration would be about 15,000 but the initial effect would be to leave some businesses in the lurch, fast food and coffee and bus driver wages would all go up while house prices went down. The benefits, which we both believe in, would take years to achieve. Time to start getting immigration under control in a methodical manner.

We need a referendum, followed by numerical quotas on different visa types.

While people expect their house price to always go up they will talk one way, while act another to keep the flow of immigrants coming.

Immigrants made me a millionaire by tripling my house price (almost wrote value!). Pity we have 4 adult working children unable to buy at these prices.

Those children are where the problems lie. Watch out when a charismatic leader arises amongst them.

You know our 3rd daughter?

Your access to our unique content is free - always has been. But ad revenues are diving so we need your direct support.

Become a supporter

Thanks, I'm already a supporter.