30/04 • NZ/INDIA FAIR TRADE AGREEMENT

New Zealand and India have signed a free trade agreement that will reduce or remove tariffs on 95% of New Zealand exports to India.

The deal also gives Indian goods duty-free access to New Zealand, includes 5,000 temporary employment visas for Indian professionals, 1,000 working holiday visas, and eased post-study work rights for Indian students.

The economic case is clear enough to understand. New Zealand exporters want better access to India’s large and growing market, especially for sectors such as kiwifruit, apples, seafood, wine, forestry, steel, and services. India is seeking stronger export pathways for sectors such as textiles, pharmaceuticals, engineering goods, and automobiles.

The concern is also real. People are asking fair questions about migration settings, housing pressure, wages, exploitation, infrastructure, and whether the benefits of trade will be shared widely or captured by a smaller group. Labour has said it will support the agreement, while warning businesses to enter the deal “with their eyes wide open” and securing commitments for more labour inspectors focused on migrant worker exploitation and immigration offending.

Where the debate has become harmful is in the way Indian people themselves have been spoken about. Shane Jones’ “butter chicken tsunami” comment was criticised by MPs across parties, including National MP Carlos Cheung, who described it as racist, while ACT leader David Seymour said immigration is a legitimate policy debate but ridiculing people through food stereotypes adds nothing.

That rhetoric has landed in a wider moment of concern. Recent reporting has connected the trade debate with anti-Indian graffiti near Papatoetoe Central School, “remigration” banners in Auckland, and public anxiety among Indian New Zealanders about whether policy debate is turning into permission for hostility.

A recent haka targeting ACT MP Parmjeet Parmar also drew criticism for mocking Indian cultural elements, with Te Pae Kahurangi later saying it did not condone racism and apologising for offence caused to the Indian community.

This matters because Indian New Zealanders are not an abstract policy category. The 2023 Census recorded Indian people as 5.8% of New Zealand’s population, and MFAT’s national interest analysis describes the Indian diaspora as part of the people-to-people foundation of the relationship.

A fair debate should be able to hold two truths together. New Zealanders can question the terms of a trade deal, the scale of migration, and the protection of workers without reducing Indian people to a threat. Indian communities can be defended from racism without every concern about housing, wages, or infrastructure being dismissed as prejudice.

The deeper issue is dignity. Trade policy affects livelihoods. Migration policy affects communities. Public language affects whether people feel safe in the country they call home.

PRAYER POINTS:

• We pray for wisdom in public leadership, that decisions about trade and migration would be honest, careful, and shaped by the common good.
• We pray for Indian communities in Aotearoa New Zealand, that they would be protected from racism and treated with the dignity owed to every person.
• We pray for those anxious about economic change, that real concerns about housing, wages, infrastructure, and worker protection would be heard without fear being turned against neighbours.