Immigration Minister Erica Stanford has refused to release a document that NZ First leader Winston Peters says shows covert discrimination against Indian citizens in migration settings. RNZ

The document is titled 'Implementation of the India-NZ FTA: detailed policy design and timelines'. Stanford withheld it in full, citing the need to protect the confidentiality of advice given by ministers and officials — a standard ground under the Official Information Act (the law that gives the public the right to request government information). She said the public value in releasing it did not outweigh the need to keep it secret. RNZ

Stanford's response arrived at 4:30pm on Friday 24 July 2026, the final day she had to respond to the OIA request. Neither NZ First nor National have been willing to release the document publicly. RNZ has complained to the ombudsman (the independent officer who investigates complaints about government decisions) about the refusal. RNZ

Peters had read aloud from the document in Parliament, claiming it showed Stanford had 'approved' changes that would discriminate against Indian citizens. He said the document included officials discussing the importance of not announcing those changes because of how India would react. He had previously raised the issue in a parliamentary question on 22 April 2026 about whether the India-NZ Free Trade Agreement would allow discrimination against Indian citizens. Hansard RNZ

Before Stanford's refusal, RNZ had sought a copy of the document on the day Peters revealed its existence in Parliament. Stanford's office initially declined, referring questions to Trade Minister Todd McClay's office and processing the request under the OIA. RNZ

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said Peters was 'just wrong' about the free trade agreement discrimination claim. Luxon said it is 'very normal that the minister of immigration imposes bespoke conditions on any FTA visas that are negotiated'. McClay said Peters was wrong and 'should stop promoting misinformation for the sake of gaining votes'. RNZ

Stanford said it was 'not helpful' for the relationship with India that Peters was making those claims, and said Peters had broken from usual processes in raising them. Peters said releasing the document himself would be 'acting outside Cabinet rules' and told reporters to get a copy from Stanford. RNZ

Peters has opposed the India FTA since before it was announced. He previously criticised immigration provisions he said could mean 'open slather immigration' of Indians taking opportunities from New Zealanders. NZ First deputy leader Shane Jones warned against a 'butter chicken tsunami' in relation to Indian immigration. A Beehive press release listing ministers involved in securing the agreement included Peters and Jones alongside National ministers. Beehive.govt.nz RNZ

Stuff had earlier reported that Stanford approved changes to immigration rights for Indian citizens, framing Peters's claims around the FTA. Stuff

The dispute sits squarely within the operational tensions of the coalition. Peters and Jones were listed as ministers involved in securing the agreement, yet both have campaigned publicly against the immigration outcomes. A coalition partner is here actively undermining a signature trade achievement of the government it belongs to, while using parliamentary privilege (the legal protection MPs have when speaking in the House) to air claims the Prime Minister and relevant ministers reject outright.

Stanford's decision to withhold the document in full is a firm OIA position. The convention protecting confidential advice to ministers is a standard ground for refusal, but blocking release entirely rather than providing a partly redacted version invites scrutiny from the ombudsman. The complaint lodged by RNZ will test whether the public interest in transparency around immigration conditions attached to an FTA overrides the convention of confidentiality.

Peters's refusal to release the document himself, citing Cabinet rules, shifts accountability to Stanford while still using the document's contents to pressure the government. It is a familiar approach for the NZ First leader — using information obtained through official channels to sustain a public campaign without breaching the rules himself. The ombudsman's investigation will be the next pressure point.