Archive for July, 2011

A letter to the Immigration Minister

July 29, 2011

Dr. Jonathan Coleman, Immigration MinisterIn move2nz’s July newsletter I pointed out some of the dramatic changes I had noticed in the selection of applications made by the department under the Skilled Migrant Category and promised to explain more.

Below is a copy of a letter I sent to the Minister of Immigration Dr. Jonathan Coleman on July 20th which fully explains my concerns. I’ll let you know what I get back.

Dear Dr. Coleman,

Re: Skilled Migrant Category

I have a number of questions relating to selections of applications made under the Skilled Migrant Category of New Zealand’s Residence programme and, rather than speculating on reasons behind perceived policies and changes, I would be very grateful if you could provide information on the following.

Most recent selections

I notice from the immigration department website statistics that the number of applications selected from the pool on 13 July 2011 (764) was significantly higher than the averages seen through 2009/10 and 2010/11 (604 and 561 respectively). In fact this was the largest selection made since 6 May 2009.

1. Can you advise why the number of applications selected has increased?

2. Can you confirm if this marks a move from policy applied since January 2010 to select approximately 550 applications each fortnight?

Within each selection made there is a majority percentage which claim points for a suitable job or job offer in New Zealand. I note that for the two most recent selections (made from the pool on 30 June 2011 and 13 July 2011) 91% of the applications included claim points for employment marking a significant increase in a percentage measure which has been largely unchanged for some time (certainly between 1 January 2009 and 15 June 2011 the average percentage of applications in each selection falling into this group was 71%).

3. Can you confirm if there is any specific reason why such a high number of applications selected over the past month include points for New Zealand employment?

4. Can you confirm if this percentage marks a change in policy or practice relating to the Skilled Migrant Category?

5.Can you confirm if this percentage is expected to be maintained or increase?

Within each selection made there is also a majority percentage of applicants making their application from within New Zealand (onshore) rather than outside New Zealand (offshore).

I note that the three most recent selections (made from the pool on 15 June 2011, 30 June 2011 and 13 July 2011) have included the highest percentages of applications made onshore since at least 1 January 2009 – increasing through 81%, 82% and 86% respectively.

Again this marks an increase in a percentage measure which has been largely unchanged for some time (between 1 January 2009 and 15 June 2011 the average percentage of applications in each selection falling into this group was also 71%).

6. Can you confirm why such a high percentage of applications made from within New Zealand were selected over the past 6 weeks?

7. Can you confirm if these selections mark a change in policy or practice relating to the Skilled Migrant Category?

8. Can you confirm if this percentage is expected to be maintained or increase in future SMC selections?

Applications selected under the SMC

As immigration department statistics confirm, from January 2010 the number of applications selected from the pool under the SMC each fortnight fell from an average of 705 in the year to December 2009 to an average of 556 in the year to December 2010. Numbers through the first half of 2011 have risen slightly to an average of 562. I also understand that the SMC quota has been reduced from 27,000 – 30,000 to 25,000 – 27,000.

9. Can you advise why the SMC quota was reduced from 27,000 – 30,000 down to 25,000 – 27,000, a drop of 10% of the maximum number?

10. Are any further changes to the SMC quota planned?

11. Are any changes to the SMC selection criteria planned?

12. How has the reduction in numbers being selected since January 2010 affected those with applications in the pool claiming 10 points for a qualification in an area of absolute skill shortage?

13. How has the reduction in numbers being selected since January 2010 affected those with applications in the pool which did not claim points for offers of skilled employment or current skilled employment in New Zealand, work experience in an area of absolute skill shortage or for a qualification in an area of absolute skill shortage?

14. As the overall Residency quota (including the family reunifications and humanitarian streams) has not decreased how is this reduction of the SMC expected to affect the other streams.

15. Is there any planned change to the overall Residency quota?

Percentage of applications selected and then declined

I notice from the Immigration department statistics presented through their website that the percentage of applications accepted through the Skilled Migrant Category (SMC) that are subsequently declined has continued to rise year on year, reaching 16.3 percent in 2010/11.

2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
SMC Applications declined 6.7% 8.7% 9.8% 10.4% 14.4% 16.3%

16. Can you please confirm why the percentage of applications selected under the current points system being subsequently declined is increasing year on year, almost doubling in 4 years?

17. Arguably the increase in applications which are selected and subsequently declined suggests a failure in the selection process, are any changes to policy or practice are planned to address this problem?

18. Is the percentage of selected applications which are subsequently declined likely to continue to increase as it has done for the past five years?

Statistics from the immigration website confirm that applications representing 30,665 individuals were selected in 2010/11. As I have pointed out, through the 2010/11 year the percentage of selected applications that were then declined hit 16.3% leaving just 25,666 individuals obtaining Permanent Residency through the SMC in 2010/11. If the current pattern continues further increases in the percentage of applications being declined could easily cause the department to fail to meet the minimum SMC quota.

19. With numbers approved Residency through the SMC falling to within 2.6% of the minimum quota what actions will be taken to ensure numbers do fall below the minimum quota in 2011/12?

20. Are you concerned that the number of individuals gaining Residency through the SMC is only 2.6% higher than the minimum quota?

Reduction in applications approved under the SMC

Arguably as a direct result of the combination of the reduction in SMC applications being selected each fortnight from January 2010 and the percentage increase in the number of those applications subsequently declined the number of applications approved for Permanent Residency under the SMC through 2010/11 was significantly lower than in the previous year.

According to statistics obtained from the immigration website 5,440 less SMC applicants obtained Residency through the SMC in 2010/11 compared to 2009/10, a drop of 20.4%.

21. Why has the number of skilled migrants obtaining Permanent Residence in New Zealand been reduced in this way?

22. How was this reduction expected to impact skill shortages in New Zealand and New Zealand employer’s ability to source skilled permanent foreign staff when no New Zealanders are available?

23. What impact has this reduction had on skill shortages in New Zealand and New Zealand employer’s ability to source skilled permanent foreign staff when no New Zealanders are available?

24. Do you consider that long term skill shortages in New Zealand are being effectively met through the SMC?

25. Do you have any intention of adjusting the number of temporary work visas to balance the reduction made in the SMC?

26. Is this cut to skilled migration through the SMC expected to continue or increase?

Thank you for your assistance with these questions, I appreciate your assistance in clarifying these matters.

Yours sincerely,

Mike Bell


New Zealand to deport abused wife

July 24, 2011

Another story of the immigration department strictly adhering to rules when a little compassion might be in order:

Govt tries to depart bashed wife
A woman who has lived in New Zealand for four years and left her abusive husband has been denied residency because of his convictions for crimes against her.

The plight of Charmain Timmons and her children, who are now illegal immigrants, has outraged Women’s Refuge, which says the Paraparaumu family should not have to suffer twice because of his cruelty.

I get the feeling from this story that there are mistakes in this article (for example I’ve never heard of the NZ government issuing a 2 year visitor’s visa!).

This will be a case to watch. Presumably under strict rules although Charmain had been approved Residency in principle there would have been a requirement for her husband to continue in his job.

As this was not done (because of domestic violence) that would be a reason for an application to fail, however this story is suggesting that the reason is her husband’s abuse somehow reflecting on her.

I am rather disappointed with the Immigration and Protection Tribunal, it seems to have changed entirely since being combined and reformed with other tribunals. Previously they appeared independent and sound, now they just seem to echo the government which is a real shame.

There appears to be an appeal to the Associate Minister so we’ll see what happens there. Such an appeal should be the safety net for people being treated unfairly however the current Minister very rarely intercedes.

Over to you Kate Wilkinson. Will you stop what appears to be a miscarriage of justice?

P.S. If anyone knows Charmain please ask her to get in touch with me. move2nz helped support and campaign on behalf of Martyn Payne, hopefully helping along the way, and would love to help in this case!

New Zealand: Big Immigration Changes

July 13, 2011

After big cuts to permanent migration are we seeing a move towards temporary visas?

On Friday 8th July a series of changes to the Skilled Migrant Category (SMC) were announced which come in to force from July 25th.

The Skilled Migrant Category is the immigration route for skilled workers, accounting for over half of all Permanent Residents entering New Zealand.

These are pretty big changes affecting a lot of people, but appears to be a backwards step in many ways. I’ll add deeper commentary in the next newsletter, in the meantime here are some of the details:


  • English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) qualifications will no longer meet the criteria for qualification points.
  • Applicants who are in New Zealand and hold, or have held, Study to Work visas will no longer be eligible for a SMC Job Search Visa.
  • Applicants with qualifications in an area of absolute skill shortage will no longer be able to automatically obtain residence without skilled employment.
  • Settlement and contribution criteria will be weighted towards skilled employment.
  • Partners and/or children of SMC Job Search Visas holders will no longer be automatically eligible for temporary visas related to the holder’s work visa.

What does this mean?

This appears to place additional barriers in the path of many skilled migrants, making it harder for families to stay together and concentrating on skilled employment.

As we have pointed out many times, to get skilled work the majority of migrants who gain Residency through the SMC (over 85 percent) have to risk everything by traveling to New Zealand and getting a temporary work visa.

In 2010/11 1,366 applications were selected from EOIs claiming over 140 points but without a job offer. Of these only 99 were in already in New Zealand and able to interview for vacancies. These changes appear to block a whole load of migrants with skills New Zealand really needs, making them more vulnerable with less certainty. Even settlement criteria – basically how likely you are or have proved you to settle happily in New Zealand – is now secondary to the job offer.

move2nz has been campaigning for greater security and transparency for migrants for years now. I would like to see pre-qualified migrants who have skills NZ really needs awarded Residency before they leave their home country so that they have a greater ability to be able to calculate and manage their migration risks. Sadly this policy appears to be moving in exactly the opposite direction.


Currently recognised qualifications attract 50 – 55 points under the SMC, but that it about to change. From July 25th qualifications between levels 3 and 6 (including trades and practical qualifications) will lose 10 points, attracting only 40 points.

Qualification points

Qualifications between levels 7 and 8 (bachelor degrees and some National Diplomas) will be unchanged, still attracting 50 points. Qualifications at levels 9 and 10 (Masters degrees and PhDs) which currently attract 55 points get an extra 5 now, moving up to 60 points.


Again sadly this appears to be a backwards step. Previously a wider range of points were awarded making it easier for those with the highest qualifications.

This however lead to lower numbers of highly skilled workers with trades and practical hands-on professional qualifications coming through the system. Instead a large number of academics were encouraged into the country, many then finding that they were unable to find or retain work in their chosen field.

While New Zealand does need migrants with top qualifications arguably there is a strong need right now is for workers to help with the Canterbury rebuild and in areas such as IT where in my experience most people have a diploma and then build experience and value through working.

Again this places additional barriers in the way of workers with diplomas suggesting that the NZ government may be intending to try and channel more skilled workers towards temporary visas only.

This to my mind would be a huge mistake as most workers who come here for temporary work are only putting up with the low wages, costs, increased vulnerability and all the issues of dragging their family to another country because of their dream of permanent status. Take this away and I think there will be a lot less applicants.

I sincerely hope that transparency will increase so that if this is the case people know the score before they start, rather than getting stuck in limbo like so many others – that will be the subject of my next post.