Australia is both a blessing and a curse for New Zealand.
On the plus side, it’s an important security partner, a favourite sporting rival, and the second largest market for kiwi exports.
Those crucial exports have held up in recent times thanks to the relative strength of the Australian economy. However, that economic strength is a double-edged sword for NZ. Australia’s higher wages, lower unemployment, and faster growth are currently acting as a magnet for thousands of kiwi workers.
Of course, this is not a new problem. NZ has been exporting citizens to Australia for decades. The kiwi-born population in Australia is now around 700,000, many of them trained at the expense of the NZ taxpayer.
Source: Stats NZ https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/net-migration-loss-to-australia-in-2023/
Unsurprisingly, the movement west is cyclical. That cycle is driven to a significant extent by economic factors like wage levels, unemployment, and the cost of housing.
Net migration from NZ to Australia has been rising steadily since 2020. What happens in Australia in 2025 will obviously have a major impact on the direction from here.
It’s difficult to predict the future in any year, but this year looks particularly uncertain for Australia. Three issues stand out – the federal election due before May, the imminent return of Donald Trump to the White House, and the sluggish state of the Chinese economy.
It’s generally accepted that the upcoming election is too close to call. The incumbent Labor government is in its first term and might normally expect to make a second term. However, these are not normal times.
Incumbency proved a heavy burden in elections around the world in 2024. This was often a result of voters, rightly or wrongly, blaming governments for cost-of-living pressures. There’s no reason to believe Australian voters in 2025 will be any more forgiving.
The cost of living is the biggest concern for Australians. And it incorporates many issues that are electorally bad news for the centre-left Labor government, including the housing ‘crisis’, stubbornly high interest rates, and elevated levels of immigration that the government seems unable to control.
Housing is a policy nightmare. Many young Australians struggling to rent a house (let alone buy one) want lower rents and lower house prices. But many policies that might achieve such outcomes are anathema to existing homeowners and landlords. It’s a lose/lose situation for the government.
Part of the problem is the wave of immigrants, both permanent and temporary, who have poured into Australia post-Covid. This has placed enormous pressure on the housing market, particularly in the inner suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. However, these immigrants, many of them highly skilled, are needed to fill labour shortages.
Many mortgaged home buyers are being crushed by the recent rapid rise in interest rates. The government is desperate for the Reserve Bank to provide relief through lower interest rates. If that relief doesn’t come before the election, the government will suffer.
Cultural issues are another problem for Labor. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese burnt significant political capital on the unsuccessful referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.
He also has problems arising from the Israel/Palestine conflict. On the one hand, many Muslim voters in key marginal seats argue that his government has been too soft on Israel and has not done enough to fight Islamophobia in Australia. On the other hand, many Jewish voters contend he has been too supportive of the Palestinian cause and has allowed antisemitism to go unchecked.
Labor’s greatest electoral asset is the weakness of the opposition. The Liberal/National Coalition is bereft of both new ideas and appealing politicians. Their leader Peter Dutton is not an easy sell. Nor is their signature policy of introducing nuclear power, particularly in the electorates where the nuclear reactors might be located.
An unpopular government versus an unappealing opposition? The result may well be a rise in the number of seats won by independent candidates, including the so-called ‘teal’ candidates (economically centrist but socially progressive).
If that happens, Australia will probably end up with a minority government. That would mean greater economic uncertainty and a government with limited ability to undertake the major reforms required to move Australia forward.
And then there’s the factors beyond Australia’s control – Trump and China.
No one knows what Trump will do when he takes office. However, from what he’s said to date, two risks stand out for Australia. The first is his policy on trade. Australia is a trading nation and would lose out from any US steps that reduced international trade. More specifically, if Trump imposed tariffs on US imports from China, that would damage China’s export business which in turn would lead to reduced Australian exports to China of iron ore and coal.
The US is the key to Australia’s security arrangements – via ANZUS, the Quad, AUKUS, and the presence of US troops on Australian soil. What would happen, and how would Australians and their politicians react, if Trump pursued an isolationist foreign policy? Or if he adopted a much stronger pro-Israel strategy in the Middle East?
China is the other great unknown. It faces numerous economic challenges going into 2025, including debt problems, an ageing population, and weak consumer demand.
Much of Australia’s economic success over the last three decades is attributable to the exponential growth of China. That country now takes a third of Australia’s exports. That’s a boon for Australia but it also represents an exposure. Those exports generate tens of billions of dollars of government revenue. The federal budget is very sensitive to changes in both the volume of coal and iron ore exported to China and the prices achieved for those commodities. A major downturn would spell economic and political trouble.
A federal election, a new US president, and an uncertain Chinese economy. Not to mention an ongoing war in eastern Europe, an increasingly hostile Middle East, and a US share market at dizzying heights.
And those are just the risks we know about. The only certainty is that other risks will emerge as the year proceeds.
Australia enters the new year in reasonable economic shape. Debt levels are high from a historical perspective but manageable compared to many other capitalist democracies. Importantly, unemployment is still only 4% and the economy is growing (just).
That’s good news for kiwi exporters. However, it also suggests Australia may continue to attract kiwi workers. The level of attraction may ultimately depend on what happens in New Zealand in 2025.
*Ross Stitt is a freelance writer with a PhD in political science. He is a New Zealander based in Sydney. His articles are part of our 'Understanding Australia' series.
91 Comments
Heatwave descends on south-east Australia with temperatures forecast to exceed 40C
Bureau of Meteorology says Melbourne’s hot weather will peak at 38C on Saturday while Penrith will reach 39C on Sunday and 40C on Monday
Keep hydrated Broocky
Just spent a few weeks there. If you like either needing to sit inside in Aircon all day, or still in a lukewarm pool, it's paradise.
As for the people being happier, I thought Kiwis were whingers, the Aussies seem to have made it a professional sport.
But whatever floats everyone's boat.
A pleasant warmth can sometimes be confronting for those that are not acclimatised, but there are very few days where aircon is strictly necessary.
That said, with first world housing you set and forget the constant temperature that you desire indoors and then get on with more important things in your life.
Whoever was whinging around you was probably doing so to help a kiwi visitor feel more at home.
A pleasant warmth is one you can easily escape from by seeking shade.
If your dwelling requires the height of technology to be comfortable, it's not a good climate.
The whinging was in earshot more than direct conversation. Wailing about migrants, cost of living, and housing are in full effect.
But, whatever story you need to validate your choices.
Indeed. In the shade right now and it's very pleasant.
Where is this magical place that you live where dwellings are comfortable all year without any active heating or cooling?
You should have stuck up a conversation with them and let them know they should be thankful as these issues are vastly worse in your homeland.
Kiwis are voting with their feet. The wisdom of the masses.
I chose to live in an area with a temperate climate and higher than average sunshine hours. There's a good half dozen of them in NZ (well, more still but they're not suitable for most people's habitation).
Also nice to take a barefoot piss outside at night.
The only people I've known to have a considerable reversal of fortunes migrating were ones that fundamentally addressed parts of their lives that weren't serving them at the same time. Most of the rest have just moved their same problems a few thousand ks, and can't afford to come home.
In other words your dwelling needs heating in winter. Well, it doesn't sound like a good climate if you need technology to be comfortable.
"Pissing outside barefoot" does not come across as first world behavior. It's also normal to pay attention to where you are walking.
Can't really comment on the social circles you keep but ok.
In other words your dwelling needs heating in winter. Well, it doesn't sound like a good climate if you need technology to be comfortable.
You can put more clothes on, or light a fire. The house I stayed in in unbearably hot straya, also had a fireplace. In one scenario, I need to modify my climate most of the year, in another, a couple months, maybe. One climate, clearly more tolerable than the other.
"Pissing outside barefoot" does not come across as first world behavior. It's also normal to pay attention to where you are walking.
Well, it's harder to see in the dark, and maybe I'm not super enamoured with first world behaviour.
Can't really comment on the social circles you keep but ok.
It's not even limited by my social circles, there's only a single percentage point difference in home ownership rates between the two countries. And given contributing aspects like familial guarantorship, work history, etc a kiwis chances of home ownership are lower migrating, not higher.
You seem to be quite a fan of developing world solutions for your developing world dwellings. Perhaps contemplate some more appropriate clothing or having a drink of water when it's warmer during the day? Would using an indoor bathroom and electric lighting be a step too far for you?
A heat source is required at least 3-4 months of the year in NZ and the costs of that are horrific because solar energy is not available during the times its needed.
As I mentioned, Australia and New Zealand are very similar, including many of the same malaises. Housing became very much more expensive over here the past few years while the NZ market crashed and burned those who did not heed the warnings of the prophet.
But that's just a side note to the weather being better, the people generally happier and proper English being spoken.
Guy on the chairlift had lived in both Dunedin in winter and Sydney in Summer. He thought they were much the same.
Come the afternoon you are sitting inside, watching telly, with curtains drawn protecting yourself from the weather.
One with the heatpump on full, the other with the AC on full.
Also - council rates are a third of what they are in NZ, they havent put speed humps on all the roads and turned them into 30kmph de facto cycleways, criminals are sent to jail so they cant keep reoffending, and they dont divide the country up into ethnic groups and then allocate things like healthcare and education based on race. Overall, just a vastly more pleasant place to live in.
Sounds like you need to do some research into racism in healthcare and education, it has been around since the crown took control of social services. Allowing maori to govern a portion of it is to reduce insitutional racism, it's ironic that some see it as racist policy.
If you have two systems with one controlled by one category and the other by those excluded from the first group then there are two possibilities: (1) both systems behave identically in which case why have them especially with the extra cost of two admins (2) they perform differently in which case there will be strong complaints about say different cancer survival rates or hospital bed availability. The latter will lead to accusations of discrimination. If the defining category is race then obviously it will encourage racism.
You assume Maori all want the same thing. Which is racist thinking.
There are more than two groups of people in New Zealand. And in healthcare you need to think of it as five million folk who want a health service in five million different ways. And that is what they should have.
Met up with a mate the other day that works in the public sector. He said most the cuts in his department were front line, and now they are really understaffed. Morale is low and people aren’t prepared to work extra hard to make up for understaffing. All to pay for a fraction of a small tax cut. No wonder people are leaving.
What public servant job cuts would that be?
"...the EFT staff total in the public service at September 2024 is only 296 less than in June 2023."
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/12/huge_savings_on_consultants.html
Not to forget that in 6 years Labour increased the public service by ~18000 / ~40% with no significant improvement in public services, including several '000s in the 6m prior to the 2023 election.
Here's one take on the effects:
'Less migration is likely to flow through to a further easing in rental demand, and, over the medium term, reduced demand for home purchasing,' CoreLogic said.
How an immigration slowdown will make houses more affordable
Unsurprisingly, the movement west is cyclical. That cycle is driven to a significant extent by economic factors like wage levels, unemployment, and the cost of housing.
Right, so not really Australia being a curse when the significant factors identified are largely under NZ's own control.
Join the dots people, ironically as the author manages to do when discussing Australia's current situation. Less immigration will mean higher wages, lower unemployment and lower house prices/rents.
Oh, but also less takeaway options I hear someone say. My apologies, best bring in another 100k immigrants in 2025, nothing is more important than takeaway options for those that already own a home in NZ.
When the Minister is removing what weak quality controls are in place (eg median wage requirement) then that doesn't bode well for the 'constitution' in my view. But yes, NZ per capita would be better off if the total number was zero since we've demonstrated a complete inability to identify quality. Indeed, we gave the decision-making to private 'employers' who just charge for jobs. I say let INZ charge 50k for a 12mth visa instead of this flowing to private individuals while the rest of us have to put up with lower wages and training but more expensive accommodation.
More migrants means both wage pressure and taxation alleviation.
Only because we tax PAYE and not capital, specifically land. And I'm the one being accused of not having a broad enough mind... Also, I'm fine with higher real wages for workers - ie one of the reasons the article identifies for the migration west. Of course, they wouldn't need an increase at all if land was sufficiently taxed. PAYE taxes could be reduced...bank loan books shrunk...ie 'getting ahead' by owning the same houses for less would make a nice change from the last few decades.
We tax many things.
Alcohol and cigarettes
Fuel
Income
Retail purchases
And so on, and such forth.
Thinking a landtax with make up for the shortfall in revenue from consuming employees is fairly wishfull. And at the same time, the aged population mandates increasing spend in areas like healthcare and social welfare.
Once there is centrally imposed residential land use on councils wrt site coverage and boundary restrictions then I'd agree to a land tax. Remove the 40% site coverage and increase to 60%, remove the 3m building limit from road boundaries, change to 1.5m, remove the 2 dwelling limit per residential section. Increase the height restrictions lower than 10m up to 10m.
Too many commentators proposing a land tax without thinking of the implications. Also the Rating valuation Act needs to be changed as it will surely be used for the valuation on which a land tax will be based.
A land tax looks through those things you suggest should be 'preconditions' of an LVT.
Even if they are 'good ideas' and may alter a given piece of lands value, they're mutually exclusive.
Why? Because the effectiveness of a land tax to raise revenue (hopefully offset against PAYE), lower the cost of shelter and encourage building/productive use of land isn't changed one way or another by those things you mention - it will always do its job irrespective of whatever other rules apply.
I didn't forget to add it JJ, I intentionally didn't mention it because it isn't relevant to my point. But I agree a higher average age is likely.
So what if half the country is on NZ super? Tax land and let them pay for it themselves, if they want it so badly. Some of us have already started caring for our elderly that even 10 years ago we wouldn't have considered spending time doing. We can adapt.
BTW, if wages were higher, housing more affordable and jobs more readily available then I'd expect more births as a result to help your average age anyway. Not enough to grow the population, but then I'm fine with a decline in population. We could export just as much with 3 million as we are with 5 million nowadays.
Not only would we have a huge population too old to work, they would also need healthcare. So half the country on super, the other half need to be doctors / nurses / caregivers, no one producing anything.
Not saying immigration is a good solution, but I’m not sure we have any other option. I think they should only allow either skilled or youth though.
So half the country on super, the other half need to be doctors / nurses / caregivers, no one producing anything.
This is just extreme hyperbole. The reality is there aren't enough 'productive' jobs today, most just shuffle paper around. Immigration today is about dividing what we have differently (e.g. employers wealth increases due to cash for jobs and lower wages, the immigrant's wealth increases with higher wages/PR compared to home country, all other existing non-home owning New Zealanders wealth decreases due to lower wages/less jobs/higher housing costs).
If we cannot afford ourselves today, bringing in more people won't change that. If you think it can, then when do we stop bringing in more people to 'solve' this aging problem? How many will be enough?
Not saying immigration is a good solution, but I’m not sure we have any other option. I think they should only allow either skilled or youth though.
Hmm, then why so quick to dismiss alternative solutions, such as mine which would also involve giving the 100,000's of under/unemployed in NZ a chance?
We are good at farming but Labour and regulations trying to kill it as best they could
We are world leaders at selling houses to each other
We are now taking our medicine, if you have made lots of money you will be ok, as you will have diversified investment into international assets.
the rest are probably screwed so going offshore to try and make a base
I’m not sure your solution will work. Why does a younger NZer stay here with all these taxes to pay for our very old population when Australia would have a much younger population and lower taxes.
Raising the age of super is probably the best solution, but seems impossible.
Why does a younger NZer stay here with all these taxes to pay for our very old population
They wouldn't, which is exactly why my solution proposes:
A) changing taxation burden from PAYE to Land (so it largely wouldn't be the young paying for it and it would lower the cost of shelter)
and B) not assuming existing entitlements are going to persist.
You've literally just given one example of B) yourself, that of raising the age of super. If we get our cost of shelter sorted or even just become more efficient by simplifying everyday life, then many more alternatives would become available with the freed-up time.
My preferred solution is this:
- Raise NZ super age to 70
- Keep KiwiSaver age at 65
- But if you take KiwiSaver before 70, the government takes enough to give you NZ super payments until you are 70 (so you can’t blow all your KiwiSaver and then expect state support).
- If you don’t have KiwiSaver or don’t have enough saved for the NZ super payment, then keep working or go on disability benefit.
- Keep raising super age as people continue to live longer.
Yes could do that. And/or increase to 5% employer match from 3%.
But at the moment KiwiSaver does not decrease the states NZ super payments. Making it the method of early retirement gives it more purpose, significantly decreases the NZ super problem, while still keeping a fair universal super system.
I can’t find any stats to support that. For example we keep hearing how much more affordable Australia is, yet it has a lower fertility rate than NZ. The US has the same fertility rate as NZ despite much cheaper housing and much higher income. But stick to your reckons if you prefer.
Rewind 70 odd years and many big families lived in a small 2 bed state house with a small bathroom and kitchen.
Tbh, I thought it was more not being able to afford a deposit for a family home meant people were putting off having children to later; and then having less children due to less viable childbearing time and less disposable income due to high debt servicing costs.
But surely there's no statistics to back that narrative up, so I must be making it up.
One way is to match or better the Aussies in tax. Removing GST on food and excise on fuel would make NZ more cost competitive. But would need to increase other taxes to make up for it.
Personally I don’t like either of those options, but food and fuel are the two big costs that are higher in NZ and in both cases it’s due to tax.
Ozi offered my teacher wife double her NZ salary. Her degree and 8 years experience also qualified her for full registration immediately (whereas I've detailed before how TEC make that devilishly hard because they want more post-graduate students in polytechs rather than teachers in classrooms).
If NZ were to offer my wife double her current salary along with full registration - she'd still say no. The weather is simply better here, and she loves the school she works at, and our children have a stable future there.
Australia's economy has been so hollowed out by the Ponzi prices, high migration from South Asia, and govt-funded employment economy, that there is really isn't much else (ex-resources).
This is arguably why the ruling elite refuse to pursue different strategies and policies.
It keels over otherwise.
Australia & NZ are joined at the hip. Yes, they're richer than us because they employ big diggers almost anywhere they can, but it's both hard & hot to earn the big money. They have been in the top two for having creamed the great Chinese wave over the past 30 years. We've done okay out of that as well, but we are not the other nation in that top two. I'm surprised there were very few politically driven posts, as they have got the goblins in power right now whilst we have asked them to please leave the building. Thank you.
And Albo & co are almost as bad as ours were, & with the first nations issues now starting to pop up here & there, they will not be far behind us I'm afraid.
I live in NZ because this is home. I visit Australia regularly, especially when it's a bit nippy here & 20 something over there. I have lived there as well & can vouch that it is not much fun working when the temp hits the 40s but that was a long time ago. The great southern states of North America have been a big driver of America's recent wealth growth curve over the past 40 years, with air conditioning a large contributing factor in that & the same logic applies to Australia today.
Both counties have a lot to offer the hard working folk who choose to live here. There are many other countries which would love to have what we have.
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.