The New Zealand Government is reportedly progressing with changes to tighten immigration settings for Indian nationals, raising concerns about the timing of this information being made public ahead of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Auckland later this month. The visit—expected to be the most high-profile state trip to New Zealand since Chinese President Xi Jinping’s 2014 visit—follows the signing of a free trade agreement (FTA) between New Zealand and India, which aims to eliminate or reduce tariffs on 95% of New Zealand’s exports.
Immigration Minister Erica Stanford has acknowledged that “initial decisions” on immigration changes have been made and sent to other ministers for feedback, but she emphasized that no “final decisions” have yet been confirmed. Stanford described the documents under discussion as "process papers" presenting various options, which have not been finalized or publicly disclosed as part of standard procedure. She also expressed uncertainty regarding some of the specific claims circulating about the proposed changes.
The issue came into the spotlight after Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters accused the National Party of covertly imposing more restrictive immigration settings targeting Indian nationals, contradicting earlier assurances about the FTA’s immigration benefits. Peters claimed these changes were made in “bad faith” and that officials were concerned about the Indian government’s reaction if the information became public. He cited a confidential briefing stating the proposed restrictions could harm bilateral relations and potentially lead to legal challenges.
Specific alleged changes mentioned by Peters include measures that would prevent Indian temporary visa holders from counting work experience towards skilled residency and require them to apply for certain visas from outside New Zealand. Peters argued that these adjustments were discriminatory and exclusive to Indian nationals.
In response, Trade Minister Todd McClay dismissed Peters’ allegations as misinformation and accused NZ First of undermining the trade agreement for political gain. McClay maintained that the party’s ongoing opposition to the FTA was unfounded and counterproductive to New Zealand’s broader economic interests.
The dispute reflects broader tensions within the coalition government over the FTA, which has seen sharp disagreements over immigration and trade policy. Peters has been critical of the deal since late 2025, arguing that the 5,000 temporary employment entry (TEE) visas negotiated could potentially lead to much larger migration numbers when dependents are considered.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has sought to downplay the intra-government conflict, noting that differences have been compartmentalized, while Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour has urged all parties to ensure statements are fact-based to maintain good diplomatic relations.
Trade analysts have described the public disagreement between senior ministers as unusual and potentially damaging to New Zealand’s standing, although it is not expected to materially affect bilateral ties. The FTA, which has passed its first reading in Parliament with broad support from National, Labour, and ACT parties, remains to be fully ratified before coming into force, establishing a framework for enhanced economic engagement with one of the world’s largest emerging markets.