NZ: an international retirement home?

Last updated 15:57 11/03/2010

Should New Zealand have chequebook entry?

The Government has decided we should - at least, for elderly foreigners who want to come and live here.

Immigration Minister Jonathan Coleman has announced that those over the age of 65 who invest a mere $750,000 in New Zealand over the two-year term of their permit can come and live here - as long as they indemnify the government from health or welfare-related costs.  

Those who have family in New Zealand can get a four-year visa if they invest $1 million.

Both visas are renewable indefinitely.

So that means that pretty much anyone over the age of 65 who is in reasonably good health and can get health insurance can come and live in New Zealand for as long as they like. That's because although the permits are only for two years, Coleman has said they can be extended.

Three-quarters of a million dollars is a paltry sum in most countries - including New Zealand actually. There wouldn't be many migrants who couldn't rake up that much through the sale of their house and sundry assets.

I wonder whether simply buying a house here would count as investing? It probably would.

So, is this A Bad Thing? I can just imagine what Winston Peters, God rest his soul, would say were he still in Parliament. But putting aside the vitriol and the usual warnings of hordes of immigrants threatening to overwhelm us, what is the benefit, and to whom?

If I were a retired German, or Brit, or American, or South African living in a pensioner flat with a bit in the bank I'd be on the next plane. Retirement in the South Pacific, where the cost of living's relatively cheap, the weather's nice, and the crime rate's (relatively) low? Yes please.

So why are we doing the world's over-65s such a massive favour? What's in it for us? Coleman says it'll boost investment in the country and give the economy a lift. Really? I'd love to see the evidence. It's a tiny sum required to come and live here, and once you're here you could practically live off the smell of the proverbial oily rag.

I can't imagine that the day-to-day running costs of the average superannuitant are going to do much for the economy. Indeed, immigration's own officials seem to agree.

Embarrassingly for Coleman, Labour's Pete Hodgson has a long memory, and he dredged up a report officials wrote last time National came up with this idea in the late 1990s.

Not to put too fine a point on it, officials bagged it. They said the plan would cost the public health system upwards of half a billion dollars a year and provide no obvious economic benefit. They also dismissed the idea of providing some sort of health indemnity, saying that even if those who took up the scheme signed an indemnity, no hospital could ever turn them away if they fell ill.

There are other issues. Even if such immigrants had proper health insurance, they will still use health resources and potentially put a strain on existing infrastructure - particularly GPs' surgeries. The elderly do tend to use by far the bulk of the health resources in any country. And fair enough, they've paid their taxes all their lives.

I'm also a bit uneasy about the whole concept of buying residence. I understand the need for a special investors' category, but this goes well beyond this. I thought immigration policy was supposed to be based on who was best to serve the interests of the country. Not trying to be ageist here, but wouldn't that be young or young-ish people who have a stake in the country's future?

Immigration policy is a vexed business, I know, but it's one area of government policy we're you're allowed to discriminate. New Zealand residency is one of the greatest privileges the government can bestow on anyone, and there's no obligation to do so simply because it's a nice place to live and people want to come here.

Personally I've never held with Winston Peters' ranting over immigration numbers per se - 40,000 a year is fine with me. But it's who you pick. Becoming a retirement home for the world's elderly while they wait for Godot is not a good idea to me.

» Follow NZStuffBlogs on Twitter and get fast updates on all Stuff's blogs.

152 comments
Post a comment
Mike   #1   04:26 pm Mar 11 2010

so after all that, what is actually your problem with hte idea, becuse you dn't say...other than a general "we don't want to be a retirement home"..??

Why not?

We aren't making our way in the world doing anything else - we want to be 1st world, but our national income is barely 2nd world.

Pensions and retirement income from overseas would probably make a big hole in our "invisibles" deficit, and god knows we need more employment........even if it is "only" changing incontinence bags!

jennifer   #2   04:28 pm Mar 11 2010

Citizenship for sale, indeed. I can imagine the red-neck screams from the tories if Labour was still in charge. But these are 'rich folks' offering safe haven to other 'rich folks' which makes it okay, from a perverse tory perspective.

Stormer   #3   04:31 pm Mar 11 2010

I have no problem with this type of immigrant, a lot better than half the rabble we let into our fine country. Colin, you call $750k a "mere" amount? There are hundreds of small companies with great ideas in this country who are begging for capital, every cent helps.

Dr Kenneth Noisewater   #4   04:39 pm Mar 11 2010

How about if they cark it here the government gets to keep their money? That would serve the interests of New Zealand just fine.

Ben   #5   04:57 pm Mar 11 2010

Really it depends where they settle. Housing has become increasingly unaffordable through generations and whilst I don't see these types settling in Naenae or Otara more housing demand on the economy isn't going to help that.

Kind of seems like a clutch at straws approach by the government to me.

Ben   #6   04:57 pm Mar 11 2010

Really it depends where they settle. Housing has become increasingly unaffordable through generations and whilst I don't see these types settling in Naenae or Otara more housing demand on the economy isn't going to help that.

Kind of seems like a clutch at straws approach by the government to me.

Ginny   #7   05:00 pm Mar 11 2010

If they go ahead with this, maybe they should raise GST higher than 15% - it's the most effective way for the government to try to claw back some of the expense of providing for the health and other requirements of more superannuitants. Of course, I already know all the arguments against a rise in GST, so what is the alternative plan to ensure a net gain?

KiwiKraut   #8   05:04 pm Mar 11 2010

Colin. You obviously have a problem, but I for one, really like the idea of financially self-sufficient people with money coming to live here. It's a damn lot better than boat loads of people who become a major burden on the welfare system. Or any immigrants with no obvious criteria or qualifications, except historical rights, but no contribution to make, other than suck the dole dry. You've opened a can of worms, this is going to be a good blog! I hope Winston writes in.

Mr Been   #9   05:14 pm Mar 11 2010

Money can buy you anything. Especially with Key and Co.

Will de Cleene   #10   05:22 pm Mar 11 2010

Ireland was once known as Tir Nan Og, the Land of the Young. Not only is National ignoring NZ's own Baby Boomer gorilla in the room, they want to encourage us to take everyone else's crocks too. We'll be Tir Nan Old in no time.


Show 11-60 of 152 comments

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you , you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.


Maximum of 1750 characters (about 300 words)

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content