in this review, we note these changes appear to negatively affect the right to family including to live and raise a family together and for children to live with their parents.31 One way to meaningfully uphold this right is for temporary migrant visas, like the AEWV, to allow participant workers to sponsor family members.32 4.4 Further media reports and review Reports of migrant exploitation continue to receive media coverage. On 28 May 2024, the New Zealand Herald reported on a determination of the Employment Relations Authority, Labour Inspector v JDFoods Ltd.33 In JDFoods there were three workers “on less than $8 per hour” who “were told they had to give $30,000 to their employers to remain in the country or risk deportation”.34 In addition the employer breached its minimum obligations in respect of annual holidays, public holidays35 and requirements to keep wage and time records. There was “compelling evidence” of falsified records.36 In October 2023, the Commission was approached by a community stakeholder, raising housing issues for migrants on the AEWV visa in their community. Since January 2024 the Commission has taken steps to examine and review the scheme focusing on interviews with workers and other key stakeholders from affected communities. This included meeting with an immigration agent who expressed concerns about the lack of checks being completed on applications. This agent reported that, following the review, INZ continued to allow ongoing automatic acceptance of employer accreditation applications without scrutiny. It is against this background that a human rights review of the scheme was prioritised by the Commission. The following human rights framework has governed the review. 31 ‘We wanted workers, but human beings came’: Human Rights and Temporary Labour Migration Programme in and from Asia and the Pacific, 2022, issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, p29. 32 Ibid, p30. 33 [2024] NZERA 288. 34 Extortion of immigrants exposed as Hamilton restaurant ordered to pay $99K in damages - Waikato Herald 35 Labour Inspector v JDFoods Ltd, paragraph [32] 36 Ibid, paragragh [38]. 11