Immigration has been one of the most politically charged issues in modern New Zealand politics. Under Jacinda Ardern, the country experienced closed borders, historic lows in migration, then record highs. Under Christopher Luxon, New Zealand has seen a sharp pullback from those peaks alongside tighter integrity rules.
So who handled immigration better? The answer depends on what you think immigration is supposed to achieve.
If the goal is stability and control, the record is mixed for both. If the goal is crisis management and fairness to migrants already here, Ardern’s case strengthens. If the goal is tightening low-skill flows and enforcement, Luxon’s reforms stand out. The data tells a nuanced story.
The Big Picture: Net Migration Swings
New Zealand’s net migration figures during this period were extreme by historical standards.
Year ended June:
- 2018: +49,000
- 2019: +52,100
- 2020: +84,800
- 2021: –6,600
- 2022: –17,700
- 2023: +108,400
- 2024: +70,400
- 2025: +13,700
Ardern’s time in office spans 2018 to late 2023. That includes both negative migration during COVID border closures and the record-high rebound in 2023. Luxon entered office in late November 2023, meaning the year ended June 2024 still reflected earlier policy pipelines. The year ended June 2025 more clearly reflects new government settings.
The record +108,400 net migration in 2023 was the highest annual gain in modern history. By contrast, the June 2025 figure of +13,700 represents a dramatic slowdown.
If “handling immigration better” means preventing record population surges, Luxon benefits from the downward trend in the latest data. But much of the 2023 spike was the result of reopening dynamics and visa processing pipelines initiated before his government took office.
Ardern’s Era: Border Closure, Reopening, and a Massive Residency Reset
Ardern’s immigration management was shaped by COVID. Borders closed in 2020. Net migration fell into negative territory by 2021 and 2022. That contraction protected public health but also created severe labour shortages across healthcare, construction, hospitality, and agriculture.
When reopening began in 2022, Labour implemented what it called a “rebalanced” immigration system. The Green List prioritised hard-to-fill, high-skill roles, particularly in healthcare and infrastructure. The Accredited Employer Work Visa replaced older work visa pathways.
The most significant move was the 2021 Resident Visa. Over 106,000 applications were received, covering more than 217,000 people. Ultimately, over 212,000 individuals gained residence through this one-off pathway.
Supporters argue this provided certainty to migrants who had lived and worked in New Zealand through the pandemic. It reduced exploitation risk tied to temporary status and stabilised essential sectors.
Critics argue it effectively locked in a large population increase without matching infrastructure capacity. Housing, transport, and public services were already under strain.
The 2023 migration surge reflects both the reopening catch-up effect and this structural residency shift.
Luxon’s Era: Integrity Crackdown and Lower Volumes
Luxon’s coalition government inherited a post-reopening surge and growing public concern over housing and migrant exploitation.
The Accredited Employer Work Visa system became the focal point of reform. By late 2025:
- Over 173,000 AEWV applications had been approved since launch.
- More than 27,000 employers were accredited.
- Over 1,100 employer accreditations had been revoked.
- More than 8,000 complaints had been received.
- Hundreds of investigations were underway.
Cabinet papers described the previous system as overly reliant on employer self-declaration and “high trust.” Reforms included English requirements for low-skill roles, minimum experience thresholds, and shorter visa durations for lower-skilled workers.
The government also shifted labour market testing requirements and compliance enforcement, aiming to reduce exploitation risk and limit low-skill inflows.
At the same time, investor visa rules were loosened to attract capital.
The result: migration levels have dropped sharply by mid-2025.
Supporters argue this shows better volume control and stronger integrity enforcement. Critics say the decline also reflects economic cooling and fewer job opportunities rather than solely policy tightening.
Comparing Outcomes
Volume Control
Ardern presided over record highs and record lows due to COVID disruption. Luxon has overseen a significant decline in net migration by 2025.
Labour Market Targeting
Ardern introduced the Green List and sector agreements to prioritise skilled workers. Luxon tightened low-skill pathways and strengthened enforcement.
System Integrity
Enforcement statistics under Luxon show aggressive compliance action. The design of the AEWV under Labour has been criticised as too permissive in its early phase.
Social Licence
High migration in 2023 coincided with intense housing pressure. Luxon’s lower 2025 numbers ease some demographic growth pressure, though structural housing shortages remain.
So Who Did Better?
If you measure success by the most recent downward trend in net migration, Luxon appears to have regained control of volumes.
If you measure success by crisis management and certainty for migrants during a once-in-a-century pandemic, Ardern’s approach was pragmatic and humane.
Ardern’s immigration era was defined by shock and recovery. Luxon’s is defined by correction and tightening.
The numbers show different strengths in different contexts. Immigration outcomes under both governments were shaped heavily by external forces: a global pandemic, labour shortages, and international mobility rebounds.
Ultimately, whether one “handled immigration better” depends on whether you prioritise stability, workforce supply, fairness to migrants, or strict volume control.
The data does not produce a simple winner. It shows two governments responding to two very different moments in history.
Discover more from The Oceanic Press
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.