As the door to New Zealand creaks open after being slammed shut two years ago the country faces a rather pivotal period.
The big question will be: Which way will most of the human traffic be heading when it comes to long-term migration over the next year or two? Will people be coming through the 'In' door or heading for the 'Exit'?
It's not just a matter of interest. It's a matter of vital economic importance.
Consider the NZ domestic situation. Since the border was shut we've seen house prices rise in the order of 40%. We've seen unemployment shrink to just 3.2%. Labour shortages abound. Wage pressures are building.
Theoretically what should be seen as things open up is a return of the inflow of migrants, with particular emphasis on those that can fill industries with the most glaring staff shortages - and dairy is one that comes to mind.
But it's not that simple. For a start we presume that lots of people want to come here and live. That might turn out to be the case, particularly as thoughts in the other side of the world now turn to for the first time in years to war and even the unthinkable 'big bang'. But it might not prove to be the case. We shall have to wait and see.
And then what will the Government's attitude be? It has indicated thus far it doesn't want things to simply return to how they were before the border shut.
Work is under way on the whole migration issue.
The Productivity Commission has been asked to look at immigration settings and is well under way with that work, having already released some preliminary findings. Its final report to the Government is due in April.
Inevitably though the Government will come under immense pressure (it's already building) to open the floodgates and allow industries to fill jobs with migrants. And with unemployment at such barely existent levels and with industries generally stressed by staff shortages, it will be hard to say no.
So, the resolve of the Government will be interesting to see.
What about the other side of the migrant equation though? How many people will want to leave?
Economists at the country's largest bank, ANZ, were suggesting this week that the reopening of New Zealand's border could see "a large net outflow of Kiwis" during the rest of this year. And they think that with likely continuation of a strong Australian labour market a net outflow of something in the order of 20,000 people across the ditch would be "consistent with previous flows" when the labour market across the ditch was last as strong as the economists are expecting.
Why might people want to leave NZ in big numbers? Well, the housing market could be a big factor. If young people see good jobs going across the Tasman and think they might be able to get into their own houses more easily when compared with in our own stratospheric market, then why wouldn't they want to go?
After all, we have been here before during times when the grass has looked greener on the other side.
Obviously if a lot of people did suddenly decide to make the move to Australia, there would be major consequences. First, it would put even more pressure on our super tight labour market. Second, potentially a lot of upward pressure would be removed from New Zealand's housing market. And this at a time when the market is rapidly sobering up after its two-year buying bender.
If large numbers of this country's great and good do start heading for the exits then I'm sure the fact New Zealand's housing market has become so rarified will be a major factor. And it will be a crying shame if this leads a big number of people to desert.
But who would blame them?
People have to do what is best for them and their future and if significant numbers of Kiwis decide the future is better offshore then what would we do about it?
Of course, as I've said before the easy fix for any Government here if we start to get a major outflow of people is to start encouraging more inbound migration.
It seems to me that we will likely already be seeing the dynamics of an open border and whether there's an exodus of people beginning before the Government's made any substantive decisions on immigration settings.
What therefore may well likely happen is that we will see policy on the hoof reacting to the actual movements in migration - rather than a considered policy that looks at what the ideal settings might be for the country's future.
And frankly, given how our migration policies have run in the past, that would be no great surprise. But it would be a huge pity given that we've had this two year 'window' when there's been negligible migration movement and a chance to sit down, have a cup of tea and actually assess what we want as a country from a migration policy.
Because, surely, a migration policy should be seen in the context of a broader population strategy and should consider the long term objectives of New Zealand. And not be driven by the short term consideration of which industries are going to be short of staff next week, etc.
Anyway, we will start to find out soon enough which way the human tide is going following the border opening.
Absent a proper population strategy and a well thought out approach to migration - which I think it's now already too late for us to achieve in the near term - I would hope at least that the Government does watch very closely what happens.
It is to be hoped that if we do indeed need polices that are reactive to the emerging migration trends that these will at least be policies that give proper consideration to the economic performance in the future and to just exactly what sort of country we want in the years ahead. Let's not just have short term fixes, please, that's how our migration policies have been run for many years.
I confess to not really having a clue what the big migration trend will be over the next year or two. It may be the feared exodus. It may be that there will be lots of people wanting to come here.
Either way, we should as a country to be ready. I fear that we aren't.
We've had two years of closed borders that have given us time to prepare for the reopening.
But when it comes to it all that's happening is that we are opening the doors and hoping for the best.
So, fingers crossed. And, no, 'fingers crossed' is not a strategy. But it's what we've been left with in the absence of a strategy.
*This article was first published in our email for paying subscribers. See here for more details and how to subscribe.
89 Comments
who are coming:
less and less Chinese, more and more Indians, Filipinos, Vietnamese, pockets of people from US, UK and South Africa stay more or less the same.
who are leaving:
Young, skilled, hopeless-in-owning property kiwis
NZ be like: old, outdated, inward looking, disconnected
just a guess.
From this morning's breakfast briefing ""Hong Kong emigration is picking up. We had noted this trend staring a few months ago, but the pace is rising. In fact, Hong Kong Government data shows that more than 40,000 people upped sticks from the territory in the past two weeks, and analysts are now expecting Hong Kong's population to fall by 2-3% every month."" Will some of those Chinese come to NZ or are they more ambitious than that?
One thing that looks promising is the "NZ Income Insurance Scheme" due to the economic uncertainty. If anything it gives people confidence to still spend money now and will have money into the future with a govt backstop if made redundant or due to disability. This is invaluable unlike if one was to go to Australia and if put into that circumstances, they won't get a cent.
A family member just told me they are looking to move to Australia. Reasons provided: too bloody expensive here, they can rent a nice place on Aussies east coast for less than half of the same place in NZ, get paid more and have better weather (less any floods?). A no brainer really.
Meanwhile, people from third world countries will move here and whoever is in power will pray they are the solution to our declining property market. This is despite many of them being crammed 8 to a house and earning less than the minimum wage driving for Uber or purchasing a courier run.
It's ok though, be kind, borrow courageously and support businesses as their prices soar, with your huge discretionary spending budget.
The govt is dumb about nurses pay. There are professions where people will leave NZ irrespective of pay - musicians, non-Rugby playing sportsmen, academics and there are professions where pay and conditions are critical. It makes no economic sense for NZ to expensively train medical staff and then give them poor working conditions and pay them less than Australia. It will cost plenty of taxpayer dollars to retain our nurses but it will be more expensive not to.
In the past I have tended to agree with you, but I have changed my mind and am coming to a different opinion.
I suspect that the government abuse and ill treatment is deliberate. It has been so ongoing and obvious that even the dumbest politician must see it. I suspect that they have a long term plan to dumb down and de-professionalise our nursing workforce so that they can control wage costs and employ lesser skilled immigrants and lower skilled NZ trained nurses. To this end I expect that we will soon see a move to change our full time nursing degree level education to an on the job education with some formal off site education. In other words down grade nursing from our very well educated and competent nurses to something tlike a low autonomy Doctors handmaiden, more like a trades qualification. They will use the forthcoming collapse (part engineered) as an excuse to make these sweeping changes to counter what would otherwise be a public outcry.
The message is clear for nurses in NZ "there is no future for you here" so your only hope is to either leave the profession and find something else or leave the country for one where you will be valued and paid accordingly.
As I have said before, if you know anybody contemplating a nursing education and you have any care about their future well being; do everything that you can to talk them out of this and pursue another career.
Get rid of hte TTMRA is what I say. It was designed to enable the free flow of skilled registered professionals across the border. Look at the stats though - most of the nurses go to Oz anda sprinkling come to NZ - it's benefiting the individuals but not the country. As someone else said it's NZ that's doing the training but Oz which is getting the benefits. Drop the TTMRA (for jobs anyway, leave the goods as is)
I hope you are wrong. Both my wife and I have had hospital treatment for serious conditions and all the staff were admirable especially the nurses. Since we live in Auckland the vast majority of medical staff were clearly immigrants as are my wife and I. However there is an ethnic dimension to nursing unlike most professions. Computer programmers, garbage truck drivers, engineers, etc need basic English but otherwise can be from anywhere, have any skin complexion and even be moderately disabled (say deaf) because their job is not face to face with clients, especially nervous ill patients. Nurses have to be aware of their patient's needs so having the majority Kiwi makes sense - able to understand Kiwi nuance and idioms.
In any job as soon as more than 50% are immigrant then there is something wrong that needs putting right. This is doubly true for nurses and care-home staff. Putting right means terms, conditions & pay.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-03/western-australia-nurses-burnt-o…
The grass might not be as green as thought. The other coast is under water ...
Absolutely right. The current government is obsessed with buzzwords such as productivity and high-skilled workers without actually realising that most NZ businesses neither appreciate talent nor do we have the economic complexity to apply that talent.
What possible purpose would an army of astute mathematicians serve in an economy where the bulk of job openings involve milking cows, plucking fruits or serving lattes?
To be fair those buzzwords are being shouted from the economist's ivory towers/silos.
Governments obviously follow the same mantra because "the economy" needs more from its workers. Nevermind that it doesn't want to pay them.
I've been thinking lately that wealth distribution wasn't the problem, it's income inequality that drives wealth inequalities.
We will always be able to attract more migrants from countries that have materially worse living standards, eg India.
The question is whether we can retain the young people whose upbringing and education we’ve subsidised. I suspect not. Particularly those who are children of migrants themselves; the only reason an educated young person has to stay in NZ is cultural and family ties, so if you have fewer of those you might as well move somewhere that’s less of a gerontocracy.
The genuinely talented migrants I have spoken to have also expressed their frustration towards the reality of NZ being vastly different from the pipe-dream of an "advanced, developed" economy that they were sold by agents, universities and employers.
Those of us who decide to stay here long-term have made peace with how primitive NZ is in terms of human capital, tech and business practices.
I believe there is a deliberate policy to push out businesses that look like they have a chance of being global players. Ordinarily if you have a shallower capital market (less ability to aggregate wealth in the population) and smaller local audience (due to small remote population you would lower your tax rates to be competitive.
singapore has a more highly educated population a tax rate 11% lower than ours is more centrally located (with better access to Asian markets) and has a lower cost of living (Ie. It is easier to pay salaries that are competitive for your essential staff) with lower unskilled labour cost. Why would you ever choose to have your company in NZ over Singapore? Similar concept applies to Ireland in the EU. Even the UK has a base rate that is 9% lower than ours and a special rate for innovative companies that is a third of our corporate tax rate. CANZUK will make it even easier for kiwi companies that establish themselves to move to the UK.
I agrre but it is not just worse living standards. My four step children would on balance rather live overseas - for three of them that would be a return to a 3rd world country despite their 18 years in NZ and NZ citizenship. The attraction of their place of origin is partly cultural / sense of community and partly family and friends. So why are they still in Auckland: (1) it is the NZ welfare state; two have young children - they trust NZ education and medical facilities (2) they would earn far less for the same job back home. Surprisingly they are not too disturbed by the lawlessness and corruption in their country of origin.
Rent is expensive for many families given the salaries in NZ and in many cases, it consumes close to one partner's salary for some.
Given the unpredictable nature of OZ with the abrupt state lockdowns and restrictions and recent weather/ flooding in QLD/ NSW, I would argue it is very difficult to plan even 3 months ahead because that opportunity that existed might not be there anymore and one might need to re-evaluated one's plans. Guess, everyone used to it during COVID anyways and end up just sitting tight and do nothing.
It is actually wage rate increases relative to productivity that is the problem, with the dole so high that from 1 April working 7 hours a week whilst on the dole (plus accomodation supplement) at min wage (+ 8% holiday pay) will allow you to earn almost as much after tax as a min wage worker working 40 hours a week. The difference of $60 or so a week is quickly eaten up by the cost of bus fares to get to / from work and packed lunches vs just eating at home.
With the incentive to work set so low and prohibitive abatement rates coming out of the dole it is difficult to raise productivity to any sort of meaningful level. On top of this companies are forced to retain unproductive workers by labour laws (this further increases the cost of goods relative to the value of labour).
Brock,
I came here in late 2003, having retired from business the previous year. I moved from just outside Glasgow and have thoroughly enjoyed life here. But, would/could I do the same now?
Almost certainly not. The house I sold then was not large, but in a desirable area( 8 offers in 2 weeks). Its value now would be around 450,000 pounds. When I moved to Mount Maunganui, I was able to buy a 240sq.m property where I still live. I don't know its current value, perhaps $1.50m? At that, it would be twice the price of my old house. Then, I was able to also buy a small property in the Mount which I still have. Times have changed greatly.
The same applies to both my sons who have been here longer then me. Life here has been good to us and this is home, but it has become absurdly expensive. Sadly, I have come to see that for all its natural splendour, there is much wrong with NZ.
Big time. Too bad the resource boom will be largely benefit the NZ agricultural sector, so won't translate into too many direct opportunities for highly-skilled professionals in NZ.
In comparison, Aussie mining corporations and their consultants will be poaching engineering, tech and finance talent from wherever they can find.
The flow of migration is generally from poorer countries to richer ones, so we can expect inflow of migrants from asian countries and South Africa and expect outflow of Kiwis to OZ (which is understandable given better pay and lower housing cost).
The thing is though, that "the opening of the NZ border" is one way, the way into NZ. There was never any restriction to leave NZ, so one could ask; if there is to be an exodus of Kiwis to OZ, why hasn't it started already?
Would you want to take the risk of leaving when the borders back to your family were shut? I'm sure plenty of people have been waiting for a bit more normality, which seems to be where we're almost at.
Congratulations if you're doing well here and plan to stay. And good on those who aren't and want to try somewhere else rather than accepting it. I'm just not sure why some of you are so offended by it.
I've wondered about this "tall poppy syndrome" and whether the original meaning has been manipulated into a false narrative.
Maybe it has egalitarian origins and refers to someone cut down for being arrogant about doing well or "better" than others. It could also refer to those that have the resources to empower and help others but instead choose to be greedy and selfish.
Also, given a field of poppies is relatively uniform, it may really originate where someone is cut down for going against societal uniformity and conformity.
Either way, the term appears to be thrown around willy nilly with no real substance.
Left six years ago,
Northern Hemisphere for three years and been in Melbourne for three.
I now earn three times as much as when we left NZ, paid off our NZ mortgage during this time.
We live a lifestyle here that wasn't accessible at home. Two late model cars, great health care etc. and a 4 bed modern house with a pool, 50 min train ride to the city. We would have to give up so much to return and is looking increasingly unlikely.
Too easy, beer is expensive though.
People havent left because there were no flights. A friend had been trying for months to get a flight out of NZ bound for Brisbane and couldnt get one. Ended up on a private charter flight out in December. Until passenger traffic is going both ways, airlines won't be putting flights on. Even now, Jetstar just cancelled all planned NZ flights until June.
Also many of the Australian States still had inbound mandatory quarantine (which you have to pay for) or were closed completely like WA. State borders have only recently been opened, and quarantine requirements removed.
There might be today now that borders are open, but there were not any last year. When the travel bubble shut, there were very few "red" flights to or from Australia at all. Flights that had been booked were cancelled. Nobody could get rebooked.
https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/air-nz-cancels-trans-ta…
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/28/the-only-way-home-austral…
Another friend of mine had to get to Queensland for work - he had to fly via Singapore and Perth.
The difference is if someone wants to move with family then the guy can go first, find the job and home (testing waters) and come back to NZ to take the rest of the family and sort out other stuff without facing MIQ.
Previously the confusion was if one person goes and for some reason, he or she have to come back to sort out some petty issues, then they have to face MIQ. Things need to be planned before taking such decisions. That's why removing MIQ will make difference to the families.
Its going to be hard just to get tourists back. Australia and NZ have a bad reputation overseas now
https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/never-going-there-austral…
A lot of commentators are saying low skilled migrants will come ie from India, phillippines, the islands etc.
The reality is very few will come to NZ- people wanting a better life through migration dont permanently move to countries where housing prices are high and the cost of living is high relative to incomes - because they know they wont be better off doing so.
Some will come temporarily to earn enough money to take back to their families and live a more comfortable life back at home.
For permanent migrants they will look for countries where housing and the cost of living is relative to incomes. A number of countries are making it very easy to attract migrants and all have better standards of living than NZ including Canada, Germany (although they may choose to house ukranian refugees to fix their migration problems) Australia.
The only advantage NZ has will be to those wanting to live at the end of the world in a peaceful ,clean country. In other words those already well off who can afford to buy a house here.
Agreed. If you're in the market for a better life, NZ is near the bottom of the list, for reasons other commenters have made, but also because we're a long way from anywhere. Perhaps the reason our migration 'strategy' hasn't worked is because the most highly qualified migrants went elsewhere and we got the leftovers (at a macro level).
Unsurprisingly we see the predictable anti-government sentiments that infest those immersed in the “business community”. New Zealand has throughout its history had a tradition of two-way migration which may or may not be related to the actions or decisions of any particular government. Perhaps those business-minded people might like to reflect on how their resolute refusal to share the benefits of employees’ efforts equitably might be the reason they are struggling to recruit the staff they want. And policies that encourage property speculators to buy multiple properties, ratcheting up house prices and rents, has contributed to the conviction among young people that the system is rigged against them getting a start in this country. So rather than reflexive finger pointing at the government, perhaps business executives and commentators could take a good hard look at themselves.
I totally agree with you there Cliopedant. People overseas see NZ as being corruption free, but they obviously dont look very closely. I am 60 + now and I cant help but look back at the 70s and believe that my parents generation enjoyed this country at its best. We have gone backwards in so many ways, and most of the deterioration could have been prevented.
OUT: NZ European, Maori and Pasifika under 40, primarily for better paying jobs in Australia and other First World jurisdictions. Oh, and a lifestyle free of patronising Covid bollocks.
IN: South East Asian and Indian immigrants to provide the cheap labour that business here is demanding. Oh, and also Ukrainians. The latter will bolster NZ's Far Right.
We're primed for a renewal of the "Population Ponzi/Replacement".
Many young and skilled kiwis will leave, and this will continue unabated until the housing Ponzi in NZ implodes and housing cost become reasonable, both in international terms and with respect to NZ average income levels.
And in order to achieve such balance, house prices in NZ have to decrease by at least 40%.
Once travel becomes easier I'm considering abandoning this country. It has been gutting to see NZ's rapid decline over the last few years. And it'll just continue to get worse under this Dunning-Kruger government, with its communist PM and totalitarian aspirations.
daughter got married on Monday - 25yrs old -- at least a dozen of her friends are just about to up and leave now the borders are open again. Three of them are ICU nurses -- of to Aussie for over 30K more !
its not just numbers its the skills they have and of course we are losing Kiwis
Apologies for the 'when I was young' but fifty years ago when I was young those trained ICU nurses would be middle class with middle income, buying or having bought their first home. Of the dozen about half would be married and having or planning children. Some would be taking OE for the fun of it but back after two or three years. Seriously it was a better time for young adults.
The steady decline in the NZ economy when compared to the rest of the world is troubling.
Yep, the damage has been building and building since the early/mid 90s. Impossible to turn around now. The country gets what it deserves.
I think I blame the Clark Government more than anyone - it was during the early-mid years of her reign that housing started to go crazy here, and her government did jack all, in fact did several things that made it worse.
But frankly they have all been awful.
Slow hand claps for respective governments of NZ......
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.