Immigration Minister Erica Stanford has launched a broadside at coalition partner Act’s immigration policy.

Stanford said comments by Deputy Prime Minister and Act leader David Seymour on launching the policy showed “he hasn’t thought through this very well”.

“That’s a little bit typical sometimes,” she added.

Stanford said the policy would be an attack on small businesses and the rural sector, who would find it more costly. In a statement to the Herald, Seymour said he was receptive to feedback that a key plank of the policy, a $6-a-day infrastructure levy, could be watered down.

Speaking to Newstalk ZB’s The Country, Stanford, a member of the National Party, said aspects of Act’s policy were “kneejerk” and “populist”.

She said it “certainly feels like” Act was trying to match the anti-immigration policies of New Zealand First.

Act leader David Seymour. Photo / Michael Craig

Stanford said Act’s proposals, including tightening up the definition of “skilled migrant” and introducing a charge of $6 a day for temporary work visas, paid before migrants arrive, were an “attack on small businesses” and an “attack on the rural sector”.

“There are certain regions in New Zealand where there is low unemployment or there are Kiwis who are simply not willing to do some of those jobs, be it in agriculture or aged care,” she said.

“We rely on migrant workers, businesses rely on them.”

Stanford said Act’s proposed $6 daily charge was “not reasonable or proportionate”.

“If you are a dairy farm worker, a herd manager for example [on a] five-year visa, that’s an $11,000 upfront cost that a migrant will have to pay on top of their visa fee on top of their health check screening, and all those other costs,” Stanford said.

Stanford said migrants would probably not be able to pay this upfront cost, which would then fall to the employer.

In a statement, Seymour told the Herald: “We support Erica in her work as Immigration Minister. In many ways, she is doing a good job and our policy is not meant as a criticism of her efforts.

“However, results speak for themselves. People are disillusioned with immigration policy and they don’t believe that it is delivering in practice what it promises in theory,” he said.

“Those who worry about immigration policy are right to worry. We don’t have enough enforcement, infrastructure pressure is real and the Kiwi character is under threat from a minority of immigrants who undermine the values previous generations have built up.

“Rather than belittling Act or writing off genuine voter concerns, Erica ought to engage constructively and heed those concerns.

“It’s true that nobody wants to pay for infrastructure if they can help it, but somebody has to. Immigration widens the base of infrastructure we require, it is not fair for the whole country to pay for that growth.

“We’re open to feedback that infrastructure pressure is strongest in urban centres, and the levy should not apply or be reduced in rural areas.”

Stanford said that the Government was looking at immigration changes, which Seymour was aware of because he had been consulted on the changes.

NZ First leader Winston Peters took to social media to note, with sarcasm, that Act’s pivot to a more hawkish stance on migration came after the signing of a free trade agreement with India, which created a new visa class for Indian migrants.

Peters said Act’s policy was a “good effort” but it “doesn’t even touch the sides”.

“We would encourage Act to watch this space for when NZ First will be announcing what a real and comprehensive immigration policy actually looks like,” he said.