---
title: "PF136 · Captured AI answers"
publisher: "Onsomble Limited"
publication: "NZBrands.ai"
edition: 1
collected_on: "2026-10-05"
html_url: "https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/8b6a1eda-9e0e-4e00-bc99-e34e4999aa5e/"
---

# PF136 · Captured AI answers

Edition 1 · answers collected 5 October 2026.

[Read on NZBrands.ai](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/8b6a1eda-9e0e-4e00-bc99-e34e4999aa5e/)

## Question

For the 2026 New Zealand general election: What are parties' current positions on migration levels, skilled workers and settlement services?

Question ID: 8b6a1eda-9e0e-4e00-bc99-e34e4999aa5e. Report reference: PF136.

Issue: Immigration. Voter: No voter described.

[Source record (JSON)](https://nzbrands.ai/data/nz-election-2026/editions/1/answers/8b6a1eda-9e0e-4e00-bc99-e34e4999aa5e.json)

## How to read this evidence

The answers below are shown as the assistants gave them, not a verified account or NZBrands.ai voting advice. They may contain errors or outdated claims. A recorded source association is not necessarily a link shown to the reader.

Captured 5 October 2026. 4 answers were saved for this question. Missing answers have not been filled in.

[Study methodology and limitations](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/method.md)

## ChatGPT · asked nationally

Answer ID: 9ea401e3-b354-49c7-a640-432b34120503. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

As of **5 October 2026**, the immigration debate has become a fairly clear dividing line in the 7 November election. The biggest differences are over **how much migration New Zealand should accept**, **how tightly skilled-worker visas should be targeted**, and **whether government should actively fund settlement/integration**. Parliament was dissolved on 1 October, so I’m treating campaign announcements as the relevant “current” positions. [New Zealand Parliament dissolved ahead of tight November vote](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/new-zealand-parliament-dissolved-ahead-tight-november-vote-2026-10-01/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

### At a glance

| Party | Migration levels | Skilled workers | Settlement / integration |
|---|---|---|---|
| **National** | No numerical cap; wants migration managed “responsibly” and targeted to economic needs | **Pro-skilled migration**; new skilled residence pathways, higher English requirements and targeted shortage occupations | Emphasis on enforcement, worker protection and existing settlement infrastructure rather than a major new settlement programme |
| **ACT** | No overall numerical target; wants migration focused on genuine shortages | **Very targeted**: skill categories expire annually unless demand is demonstrated | Stronger English, citizenship/values expectations; **5-year welfare stand-down** and infrastructure surcharge |
| **Labour** | Wants migration planned around **housing, infrastructure and workforce capacity**; no current fixed net-migration cap in its latest policy | Skilled migrants welcomed where needed; stronger employer protections and easier movement between accredited employers | **Strongest explicit integration package**: orientation/civic education and more community support |
| **Greens** | Opposes cutting migration simply to reduce numbers; favours humanitarian/family and worker pathways | Welcomes migrant workers but wants strong employment rights and to end exploitation | **Strong settlement focus**: residency pathways, refugee resettlement funding, Treaty education and family reunification |
| **NZ First** | **Largest reduction proposed**: referendum on a **20,000 resident-visa annual cap**, tied to infrastructure | Highly restrictive; priority to New Zealand workers and critical shortages; tighter student/work pathways | Integration and commitment to NZ emphasised, but with much less state welfare/support for migrants |
| **Te Pāti Māori** | **No specific 2026 numerical target published** | No detailed 2026 skilled-worker programme identified | Frames immigration through **Te Tiriti, whanaungatanga and migrant/community rights**; comparatively little detailed 2026 immigration policy |

## National

National's current position is essentially **“targeted, skilled migration rather than a blanket reduction.”** Christopher Luxon has said New Zealand will continue to need migration because of population ageing, while the Government's immigration policy is intended to balance jobs for New Zealanders with employers' need for skills. [Hansard - New Zealand Parliament](https://hansard.parliament.nz/hansard-transcript/2026-05-14/oral-question-5-health-asked-by-dr-vanessa-weenink-answered-by-hon-matt-doocey?sId=5b01f40a61a04a76910f399e6e90e3e9&utm_source=chatgpt.com)

For skilled workers, National has introduced two new residence routes:

- a **Skilled Work Experience** pathway for experienced workers; and
- a **Trades and Technician** pathway for specified skilled occupations.

It has also reduced the work requirement for some NZ-qualified graduates and introduced additional restrictions for occupations where it considers residence shouldn't be available. [New residence options to bolster workforce | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/20250923-hon-nicola-willis-new-residence-options-to-bolster-workforce?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

National has simultaneously tightened the lower end of the system. Basic English requirements now apply to Skill Level 3 AEWV positions, and the Government has increased enforcement against migrant exploitation and immigration breaches. [English language requirement extended to AEWV skill level 3 roles | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/20260525-honericastanford-level3?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**Settlement:** National isn't campaigning on a large new settlement-services expansion. Its emphasis is more on **making migrants and employers comply with the rules, protecting workers from exploitation, English-language capability, and making existing systems work**. The Government has, for example, put $18m over four years into additional compliance and labour-inspectorate teams. [More resources to combat migrant exploitation | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/more-resources-to-combat-migrant-exploitation?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

## ACT

ACT is unusual because it **doesn't propose a headline migration cap**, but wants the system to become much more selective.

Its key proposal is that every AEWV skill category should **automatically expire each year unless there is current evidence of demand**. In other words, employers could still recruit overseas, but the Government would have to continually establish that the skill shortage remains genuine. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/making-immigration-work-for-new-zealand)

ACT also proposes:

- basic English requirements across all AEWV categories, except lower requirements for seasonal workers;
- a dedicated overstayer-enforcement unit;
- a **$6/day infrastructure charge** on temporary work visas; and
- a **five-year stand-down from income-tested welfare** for residence-class migrants. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/making-immigration-work-for-new-zealand)

ACT subsequently proposed physical-presence requirements for permanent residents, arguing that permanent residence should represent a genuine connection to New Zealand. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/act%E2%80%99s-new-immigration-policy-to-put-%E2%80%98reside%E2%80%99-back-in-%E2%80%98resident%E2%80%99?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

So ACT's approach is **not “stop migration”; it's “make migration much more explicitly conditional on economic contribution, English, infrastructure contribution and compliance.”**

## Labour

Labour's September 2026 policy is more nuanced than simply “cut migration.”

It says immigration should be planned through a **Government Policy Statement** that takes account of:

- workforce and demographic requirements;
- housing capacity; and
- infrastructure capacity.

The important distinction is that Labour's current announcement **doesn't set a fixed net-migration number**. Its earlier political debate around a 20,000–30,000 reduction is sometimes cited in comparisons, but Labour's current policy is framed around capacity and composition rather than an explicit annual net-migration cap. [Release: Labour to ensure an immigration system that works for New Zealand](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-to-ensure-an-immigration-system-that-works-for-new-zealand/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

For skilled workers, Labour wants to retain an immigration system that attracts skills New Zealand needs, while making the AEWV less exploitable. Migrants would be able to move between accredited employers after three months, and Labour says it would strengthen access to support in communities. [Release: Labour to ensure an immigration system that works for New Zealand](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-to-ensure-an-immigration-system-that-works-for-new-zealand/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**Settlement is one of Labour's clearest differences.** Labour proposes extending the period before permanent residence from two to four years, but pairing that with a programme of **New Zealand orientation and civic education delivered through community education providers**. It also proposes better access to community support for migrants. [Release: Labour to ensure an immigration system that works for New Zealand](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-to-ensure-an-immigration-system-that-works-for-new-zealand/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

So Labour's model is roughly **moderate/restrained migration + strong workforce targeting + more deliberate integration**.

## Green Party

The Greens are the clearest **pro-settlement and pro-migrant-rights** position among the larger parties.

Their 2026 manifesto says migrant workers should have a fair opportunity to settle and proposes:

- residence pathways for long-term migrants, including some people whose visas have expired;
- allowing migrant workers to change employers;
- removing the 12-month stand-down between work visas;
- clearing refugee-family-reunification backlogs;
- restoring birthright citizenship;
- removing income barriers for parent sponsorship;
- providing **Te Tiriti education to new migrants and refugees**;
- increasing the refugee quota progressively to **5,000 by 2029**;
- increasing funding for refugee resettlement; and
- devolving some immigration resources and decision-making to hapū and iwi. [Immigration and Refugees - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026_immigration_and_refugees)

On migration numbers, the Greens **do not propose a headline numerical reduction**. Their emphasis is on whether migrants have rights, decent employment conditions and realistic routes to permanent settlement, rather than using a lower migration number as the policy objective. [Immigration and Refugees - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026_immigration_and_refugees)

## New Zealand First

NZ First has by far the most explicit numerical restriction.

Its September policy proposes a referendum on a **legislated annual resident-visa cap of 20,000**, with migration settings directly linked to infrastructure capacity. It also proposes a 30-year population plan coordinating immigration, housing and infrastructure. [NZ First Announces Immigration Reform Policies - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_first_announces_immigration_reform_policies)

It goes substantially further on eligibility:

- permanent-residence qualifying period: **2 → 5 years**;
- citizenship: **5 → at least 10 years**;
- **10-year welfare stand-down** for non-citizens;
- removal of automatic work rights for international students;
- tighter asylum rules;
- broader deportation powers; and
- a 24-month amnesty for overstayers before permanent exclusion for those who remain unlawfully. [NZ First Announces Immigration Reform Policies - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_first_announces_immigration_reform_policies)

For skilled workers, NZ First's philosophy is that immigration should fill **genuine critical shortages**, while New Zealanders should be first in the queue for employment. It is particularly opposed to immigration becoming a mechanism for supplying cheaper labour.

Its settlement philosophy is therefore quite different from Labour/Green: it talks about **integration, social cohesion and commitment to New Zealand**, but simultaneously proposes substantially restricting migrants' access to welfare and extending the path to permanent residence/citizenship. [NZ First Announces Immigration Reform Policies - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_first_announces_immigration_reform_policies)

## Te Pāti Māori

This is the party where the evidence is thinnest.

As of the latest 2026 election material I could verify, **Te Pāti Māori has not published a detailed immigration policy with a migration target or a specific skilled-worker programme**. Independent election-policy trackers likewise record no specific 2026 immigration announcement. [Immigration - Retail NZ](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/policy-positions-immigration/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

Its broader policy framework puts much greater emphasis on **Te Tiriti, tino rangatiratanga and Māori decision-making**. That suggests immigration/settlement policy would be approached through those principles, including relationships between migrants, tangata whenua and communities, rather than through a simple population target. But I would **not attribute a specific migration number or skilled-worker setting to Te Pāti Māori without a published policy**.

## The real dividing lines

If you strip away the rhetoric, there are roughly **three competing models**:

1. **National / ACT:**  
   Migration remains an important source of labour and skills, but should become **more selective and economically targeted**. ACT would impose considerably stronger conditions on migrants.

2. **Labour / Greens:**  
   Migration should continue where New Zealand needs people, but the emphasis is much more on **worker protection, family/community settlement and integration**. The Greens go considerably further on residency and humanitarian pathways.

3. **NZ First:**  
   **Reduce migration substantially**, establish an explicit resident-visa ceiling, make permanent residence/citizenship harder to obtain, and prioritise New Zealand citizens for jobs, welfare and public resources.

One important caveat: **“migration level” isn't one thing.** Net migration, residence approvals, temporary work visas, international students and refugee admissions are different flows. A party can reduce one without necessarily producing an equivalent reduction in net migration. That's particularly important when comparing Labour's capacity-based approach with NZ First's proposed 20,000 resident-visa cap.

If you're interested specifically in **settlement services** (English classes, employment assistance, migrant/refugee community organisations, family reunification, orientation, etc.), I can also break down **what each party would actually fund/change in those services**, rather than just their broader immigration policies. [How we fund settlement services :: Immigration New Zealand](https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/our-strategies-and-programmes/supporting-people-from-overseas-to-settle-in-new-zealand/how-we-fund-settlement-services/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**End captured answer**

## Gemini · asked nationally

Answer ID: 1a261920-da68-4e9b-8011-a69ba1764594. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

As the political parties shape their campaigns ahead of the general election, immigration, skilled workforce settings, and settlement frameworks have emerged as key points of debate. 

### Migration Levels and Overall Volume
* **New Zealand First:** Advocates for a major reduction in non-essential immigration, arguing that population growth has outpaced infrastructure. Their proposals include introducing a referendum to cap annual resident visas at 20,000, lengthening qualification periods for citizenship or permanent residency from five to ten years, and ending automatic birthright citizenship for the children of non-citizens.
* **ACT Party:** Supports targeted immigration but has proposed structural shifts, such as abolishing indefinite Permanent Resident Visas in favor of five-year renewable travel conditions requiring a physical presence threshold (730 days in New Zealand over five years). They also propose a temporary work visa infrastructure surcharge of $6 per day to offset public costs.
* **Labour Party:** Focuses heavily on the duration of the residency pathway rather than blunt volume caps, proposing to double the wait time for permanent residency from two years to four years to encourage deeper community roots. They also propose a visa-free entry framework for Pacific Islands Forum citizens (via an NZeTA).
* **Green Party:** Emphasizes humanitarian concerns and long-term settlement, opposing strict volume cuts and advocating for regularisation pathways for long-term undocumented migrants, alongside the removal of restrictive health requirements for residence.

### Skilled Workers and Employment Pathways
* **Current Settings & Coalition Context:** The broader Skilled Migrant Category (SMC) framework incorporates pathways focusing on median-wage thresholds and specific skill-level groupings (such as the recent introduction of specific trades/technicians and work-experience paths managed via updated occupation lists). 
* **ACT Party:** Proposes targeted economic modifications, including a new "Rural Workforce Visa" for agricultural sectors (dairy, sheep, beef, and general farming) that provides a clearer pathway to residence without regional lock-ins, alongside tighter reviews of Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV) Green Lists and broader English language requirements across all ANZSCO skill tiers.
* **New Zealand First:** Takes a more restrictive stance on temporary pathways, proposing that international students lose automatic work rights and must apply under strict conditions ensuring local workers are not disadvantaged, alongside requiring students to leave the country before transitioning to subsequent visas.
* **National Party:** While holding the lead role in the current administration, they have taken a measured approach to formal campaign-specific announcements on immigration tweaks, focusing primarily on maintaining balance in workforce shortages while ensuring compliance and employer accountability.

### Settlement Services and Social Integration
* **Civic and Integration Programs:** Parties on the center-left (such as Labour and supportive progressive groups) emphasize structured orientation, civic education programs, and stronger statutory protections against migrant exploitation to maintain social cohesion. Conversely, parties on the right emphasize tighter civic criteria—such as NZ First's proposals to restrict welfare access (implementing a 10-year stand-down), limit superannuation and voting rights strictly to citizens, and prioritize social housing for citizens over permanent residents.
* **Support Services & Backlogs:** The Green Party strongly advocates for increased resourcing for Immigration New Zealand to clear Tier 1 and Tier 2 family reunification backlogs and expedite asylum processing, contrasting with right-leaning parties that push for stricter thresholds and tighter restrictions on asylum claims lodged from temporary work visas.

---

What specific aspect of these party policies—such as skilled pathways, family reunification, or temporary work rules—would you like to explore further?

**End captured answer**

## Google AI Mode · asked nationally

Answer ID: ebdd82ae-647d-49b9-8dec-232c4dc59a1b. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

For the **_2026 New Zealand general election_** , political parties have drawn distinct lines on migration levels, requirements for skilled workers, and the rights and timelines associated with permanent residency and settlement.

The major party positions break down across the key focus areas as follows:

1\. National Party

 * * **Migration Levels & Settings:** Prefers maintaining stable, managed settings aligned with economic growth plans (such as their "Going for Growth" agenda). They emphasize filling genuine workforce shortages in critical sectors like healthcare and agriculture without sharp, disruptive caps.

 * **Skilled Workers:** Supports the ongoing refinement of the Skilled Migrant Category and occupation lists to target high-value skills and ease pathways for accredited employers needing critical labor. [www.livinginnz.co.nz]

 * **Residency & Settlement:** Opposes radical overhauls like abolishing permanent resident visas (PRVs) and generally maintains standard baseline support for established settlement frameworks, rejecting populist amnesties or extreme rollbacks.

 *

2\. ACT New Zealand

 * * **Migration Levels & Settings:** Focuses heavily on tightening infrastructure strains linked to population growth. ACT has proposed a temporary visa infrastructure contribution levy to fund public works and wants sharper scrutiny on low-skilled vs. high-skilled visa allocations (critiquing past allocations for fast-food vs. specialized technical roles).

 * **Skilled Workers:** Proposes annual reviews of skilled job lists and stricter English language requirements for applicants and their dependents to reduce systemic strain on public services like healthcare. [YouTube·nzherald.co.nz]

 * **Residency & Settlement:** Proposes significant tightening, including abolishing permanent resident visas, replacing parent resident visa ballots with strict queues, establishing a dedicated overstayer enforcement unit, and imposing a 5-year bar on welfare access for certain migrant categories.

 *

3\. New Zealand First

 * * **Migration Levels & Settings:** Campaigns on the most restrictive migration platform, calling for a public referendum on capping annual permanent resident visas at 20,000.

 * **Skilled Workers & Visas:** Proposes removing automatic work rights for international students (requiring offshore re-applications for subsequent visas) and strictly limiting asylum and temporary student inflows.

 * **Residency & Settlement:** Advocates sweeping rollbacks to settlement rights: extending the path to permanent residency from two to five years, doubling the citizenship qualification period from five to ten years, restricting birthright citizenship to children of citizens, and barring non-citizens from state welfare assistance for their first decade in the country.

 *

4\. Labour Party

 * * **Migration Levels & Settings:** Focuses on a balanced approach to net migration that respects labor market needs while addressing local infrastructure and housing capacities.

 * **Skilled Workers:** Generally supports structured pathways for essential workers and accredited employer frameworks while guarding against migrant exploitation.

 * **Residency & Settlement:** Has proposed adjustments to settlement rules, such as extending the timeline required to transition to permanent residence (e.g., doubling the timeframe), conducting financial reviews of parent visa settings, and supporting humanitarian considerations like citizenship pathways for children of undocumented long-term residents. [www.livinginnz.co.nz]

 *

5\. Green Party & Te Pāti Māori

 * * **Migration Levels & Settings:** Strongly opposes anti-migrant rhetoric and populist caps, emphasizing humanitarian obligations, refugee quotas, and fair treatment of migrants already in New Zealand.

 * **Skilled Workers & Settlement:** Advocates for equitable access to public services, robust social support, and human-rights-focused settlement systems. They have historically supported regularisation pathways (amnesties) for overstayers to integrate long-standing community members safely.

 *

Would you like to dive deeper into **how these policies impact specific visa categories** (such as Parent or Accredited Employer work visas) or compare the **economic projections** behind the parties' targets?

**End captured answer**

## Google AI Overviews · asked nationally

Answer ID: ad192c99-e81e-4fc1-8aec-05554eb82072. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

For the **7 November 2026 New Zealand general election**, immigration has emerged as a major campaign battleground. Political parties have put forward sharply differing frameworks regarding migration volumes, pathways for skilled labor, and rules surrounding settlement and social services.

### 🔵 National Party

As the lead party of the current coalition government, National is largely campaigning on a **continuation of its established settings**.

- **Migration Levels:** Focuses on managed growth that aligns closely with infrastructure capacity, avoiding hard numeric caps.

- **Skilled Workers:** Prioritizes their _Going for Growth_ program, utilizing the revamped Skilled Migrant Category and a New Occupation List to quickly link temporary workers to stable residency pathways.

- **Settlement Services & Rules:** Minister Erica Stanford has heavily funded frontline enforcement and expanded deportation liability to protect migrants from workplace exploitation. Notably, National **opposes** its coalition partner ACT’s push to abolish permanent resident visas.

### 🔴 Labour Party

Labour advocates for a tightly managed approach to migration through a newly proposed **Government Policy Statement** tied directly to the country's collective workforce, housing, and infrastructure needs.

- **Migration Levels:** Does not advocate for a specific cap, but emphasizes aligning migration rates strictly to the economy's immediate capacity.

- **Skilled Workers:** Focuses on greater mobility, planning to allow skilled migrants to **move between accredited employers after just three months** to limit workplace exploitation.

- **Settlement Services & Rules:** Intends to **double the time it takes to secure a Permanent Resident Visa from two to four years** to ensure migrants "put down roots." This would be paired with a mandatory New Zealand orientation and civic education program. They also propose a citizenship pathway for children born to undocumented parents after 10 years of continuous residence.

### 🟡 ACT New Zealand

ACT takes a market-driven stance that strips back bureaucratic red tape for employers while implementing tougher, presence-based requirements for migrants.

- **Migration Levels:** Supports open economic migration but demands tighter control on enforcement and access.

- **Skilled Workers:** Backs an annual skilled jobs list review tracking real-time economic shortages. However, temporary work visas would carry a new $6 daily infrastructure charge.

- **Settlement Services & Rules:** Plans to completely **abolish the Permanent Resident Visa category**. Instead, standard Resident Visas would feature a rolling 5-year travel facility requiring holders to be physically present in New Zealand for at least 730 days to retain re-entry rights. ACT also proposes an overstayer enforcement unit and a **strict five-year welfare stand-down**before new residents can access benefits.

### ⚫ New Zealand First

NZ First has unveiled the most restrictive package, bringing a 14-policy framework designed to heavily reduce non-essential migration and preserve local public services.

- **Migration Levels:** Pushing for a **public referendum to implement a hard annual cap of 20,000 resident visas**.

- **Skilled Workers:** Aims to restrict automatic student visa work rights and heavily penalize employers who look to bypass local workers for cheap labor.

- **Settlement Services & Rules:** Proposes doubling the qualifying period for permanent residency to 5 years and citizenship to 10 years. It would enforce a **10-year welfare stand-down** for non-citizens, limit voting rights strictly to citizens, ban asylum seekers from utilizing temporary work rights, and give undocumented Pacific overstayers a strict two-year self-deportation amnesty window.

### 🟢 Green Party

The Greens reject the anti-migrant rhetoric coming from right-leaning parties and look to prioritize humanitarian principles and worker freedom.

- **Migration Levels:** Believes in expanding humane intake options and opposes numeric caps.

- **Skilled Workers:** Demands the **decoupling of work visas from specific, single employers** to eliminate structural power imbalances and completely prevent exploitation.

- **Settlement Services & Rules:** Strongly supports an official amnesty and regularisation pathway for overstayers, a broad 5-year pathway to residency for all essential workers, and specific immigration law provisions to absorb and support individuals displaced by climate change.

### Direct Policy Comparison

| Party | Proposed Migration Level Setting | Skilled Worker Priority | Key Settlement / Visa Rule Changes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| National | Infrastructure-aligned capacity (no hard cap) | Going for Growth settings, fast residency pathways | Retain 2-year Permanent Resident Visas; increased exploitation enforcement |
| Labour | Tied dynamically to Government Policy Statements | 3-month job mobility for workers; protection against exploitation | Double PR wait time to 4 years; introduce mandatory civic orientation |
| ACT | Market-driven, employment-led | Annual review of skills shortage lists; $6/day visa fee | Abolish PR visas; introduce 730-day physical presence rules; 5-year welfare ban |
| NZ First | Referendum on a hard 20,000 resident visa cap | Strictly limit student work rights and entry-level competition | 10-year citizenship pathway; 10-year welfare ban; strict overstayer deportation |
| Greens | Open, expanding, humanitarian focus | Decouple visas from single employers | 5-year residency pathway for all essential workers; overstayer amnesty |

**End captured answer**

## Publication and corrections

Published and funded by Onsomble Limited. NZBrands.ai takes no view on any party or policy.

[Independence](https://nzbrands.ai/about/independence/) · [Corrections](https://nzbrands.ai/about/corrections/) · [Contact](https://nzbrands.ai/about/contact/)