So, how exactly did we get residence for my brother so quickly? Part 3.
So, unbelievably, we managed to get a meeting, not with the case officer, because there wasn’t one; but with the person in charge of all family residence applications.
I didn’t sleep much, had a migraine when i woke up, and also had a doctors appointment that morning for some tests; which ran late. SO by the time it came to our meeting; i was exhausted, in pain, and terrified. I guess that sounds a bit over dramatic if you haven’t been there, but after the way we were treated by London, I was genuinely worried about what we would be faced with.
What we were faced with, it turns out, was a lovely gentleman, who sat us down, went through the file and told us that in fact they could make a decision on whether Visitor Permits were extended, and that despite what we had been told by other staff, and a $450 an hour lawyer – it does NOT require the immigration minister to intervene.
I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. I really didn’t.
He also looked through the file, and said that he could spend a week or so going through it, and look at whether the residence application could be processed now. I think he could see what a mess I was and took pity on me. I did tell him i hadn’t slept properly in months. It also helped that my brother was through the medical, so it basically made it an easy case to process, and i guess gets them nearer their targets.
I was gobsmacked.
Well, by the time i got home later that evening – a case officer had been assigned. He said it would take a few weeks to process the application. 2 days later, we got an email to say it had been approved in principle, and just had to be verified by management.
I screamed.
A few days later they asked for a letter from the prospective employer stating that the job offer was still available. This was a week after the meeting. We had to wait a few days to get that because the guy was away, but once again he came up trumps and got us a scanned copy via email, which was followed up by a letter in the post. The scan was sent to INZ on the Monday, and the original handed in on the Wednesday.
Wednesday afternoon, just as hubby was phoning me about being redundant, and just 2 weeks after our meeting – my brother opened a letter saying his residence was confirmed and could they have his passport and Migrant Levy.
Thursday morning at 9am I sat in the Wellington office, and 10 minutes later was asking a very nice man if they could possibly take the money in person and let us have the permits today. He didn’t know, but asked the case officer, who said yes, and 10 minutes later I had my brothers passport in my hand with a residence permit in it.
And somehow I did not embarrass myself by bursting into tears in the middle of Immigration in Wellington.
THE END .
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
So, how exactly did we get residence for my brother so quickly? Part 2.
We managed to enjoy a family Christmas, but during January, the panic over how to deal with my brother possibly being kicked out of New Zealand started to return. I started not sleeping again, and began to wish I’d never come here in the first place. I started writing a letter to immigration stating the reasons why it would be unreasonable to expect my brother to return to the UK, and just what effect it would have on the rest of us. I also started trying to work out how the hell we would go about selling all our properties if we had to leave. Where would we live? What would we do?If my brother had to go back, my parents would go back. And I just couldn’t bear the thought of them all having to go back when they had given up so much to come out with us.
I emailed the immigration officer who had dealt with the Visitor Permit, to ask some questions about the Job Offer, and what information the employer had to provide to prove the offer was real. The employer was getting a bit concerned, and wanted to get as much sorted out as he could ready for when immigration finally got round to asking. (This is the kinda attitude that makes coming to NZ worthwhile). After two weeks i had no reply, so had to ask again. It didn’t improve my mood.
I was told to ask the Head of the Family Residence team – something that then put me in cold sweat after dealing with the horrid woman in charge in London. But this guy answered my questions quickly and properly. He did suggest (as had the lady dealing with the visitor permit) that a work visa could be organised, but it would have to be Labour Market Tested.
I did point out that an admin job fails the labour market test.
We also decided to ask people we know for letter of support to go in with this, with the intention that all the letters would accompany a second application for a visitors permit.
In the end, I got so worked up, and started to doubt my own judgment. What scared me most was that we had been told this would require the Immigration Minister to make the decision. I shed a lot of tears over my stupidity in arguing about the Immigration Advisors Licensing bill and the fact that it would probably cost my family so much. The frustration was literally overwhelming some days.
I was so at a loss, I actually went to see an Immigration Lawyer. He confirmed that it would take ministerial intervention, and we would have to work hard at convincing him (the minister)that my brother would benefit New Zealand.
Thats when I started to get suss!
You see – the policy clearly states that my brother doesn’t have to benefit NZ. If he was a benefit – he would be able to get a work visa, or residency through the skilled migrant category. The family policy is for people who, like my brother, do not have skills or degree level education. WE are the benefit to NZ, which is how we have the right to migrate here. As a thank you, the Family Policy allows us to bring our families in because we have given three (or 5 by this point) years of our lives to the country, while being separated from our families.
He told us that it would take about three months to get anything seen by the minsiter, so we had best act now. He also told us that probably the best thing to do was for my brother to leave a week before the end of his permit, go to Australia for a week, and come back, when he would in all likelihood get another 6 months stamp in his passport.
What the hell can you say to that as a piece of “immigration advice”???
It cost us $450.
It was also complete rubbish as it turned out.
So still wondering what the hell we were going to do, we sent out emails to our friends and colleagues. People we have worked with, done business with, drank coffee with, and asked them to write letters on our behalf. I can tell you – it wasn’t easy. Most of them had offered before at one point or another, but it is quite another thing to have to go round and ask so many people for help.
We also went for a chat with our mentor. And while we filled him in on what we were doing, he suggested that we try to get in front of the Case officer at immigration. That sent me into another cold sweat, as it was basically the refusal of the London Case officer to speak to us that caused the nightmare my parents application turned into. But i thought – well – it can’t get any worse can it?
So I emailed this chap again and asked for an appointment.
And he gave us one the next day.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
So, how exactly did we get residence for my brother so quickly? Part 1.
Filed under: NZIS & Immigration issues, The Family Sponsorship Saga
I’m sorry it has taken me so long to write this. After just over two years of dealing with the family sponsorship process, which is without a doubt much more difficult and stressful than getting residency as a skilled migrant – I’ve been knocked out with a chronic migraine.
I can only assume my mind decided to shut down for a few days.
So first, to recap:
The application went in in July 2009. We expected things to run fairly quickly – because the Adult Sibling applications require a job offer to be included. SO it was with a certain amount of shock and frustration to be told it would take 12 months for a case officer to be assigned. How on earth can you keep a job offer open for 18 months to 2 years.
I asked some questions, and got the usual crap pointless answers back. The kind of answers that mean people like me spend so much time answering peoples questions instead, because we actually give sensible answers.
And then we slapped in an application for an extension to my brothers visitor application. And then hit our next shock when immigration said they had approved it, but the permit came back dated the same day as his original permit expired.
Fortunately, the case office who had cocked this up, fixed it immediately. We went into the Wellington branch to get it sorted in person, and found out that any further extensions would require an “exception to policy” and that the only person who could do that was the Immigration Minister.
And then I started to panic.
I mean – I’ve probably not made myself too popular in the ministry. It’s a bit scary to think that my opinion of Immigration Agents could ruin my family’s chances. We were advised to put in a further application nearer the time it was needed, and with it, give as many reason as we could why my brother should be allowed to stay as a visitor while his residency was being sorted out. It was suggested that a letter to the branch manager was in order at this time.
I still cannot believe that applicants are being forced to do this. It’s nuts. It doesn’t hurt New Zealand in any way to allow long-term visitor visas for family members who are applying for residency. They cannot work; they cannot take benefits, except for ACC accident compensation, which is available to any tourist anyway. All they can do is spend money in New Zealand. Not allowing it causes a huge amount of frustration and stress for the whole family.
Anyway, we had managed to get an extension to the visitor permit, which meant that my brother could stay in New Zealand till June 2010. It also meant that I could take a few months off from panicking about the whole situation till at least the end of January.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
An interesting Immigration report – part 2
Filed under: Hubby's Views, Life in New Zealand, NZIS & Immigration issues
I blogged last week about the two immigration reports that were published side by side.
The first one was fascinating.
I’ve now read through the second one, Migration Trends & Outlook.
It was nowhere near as interesting as the first. Which is strange.
This second report is the one produced annually, is the major report that the first one uses as a basis, it has more content, more statistics & should be able to discuss trends better – and yet it does not. If anything the ‘trends’ part of the title is highly deceptive, as there is very little analysis or discussion of trends. Let alone any extrapolation of those trends in to the future. So the ‘outlook’ part of the report is also fibbing.
So we’re left with a report on Migration.
Which about fits, since it’s a mainly dry analysis of the statistical facts, with few conclusions drawn. And a lot of repetition. Apart from the odd self-congratulatory back slapping about what a good job INZ is doing. Which is repeated a few times just in case you didn’t get the message the first time round.
So what interesting information can we gleen from this report?
1. The Foreward tells us that 60% of the growth in the working age population from 2001-2006 has been from inward migration.
Which is then set against actual population growth in NZ. Natural population growth (births) is seen as the main driver, although that number is only an estimated figure put at 28,000-35,000 per year – compared with net migration of some 4,500 in recent years. Put a different way around, the spikes in NZ population growth are due to net inward migration, and most of those people (not unsurprisingly) are of working age.
2. The first major piece of spin we come across is in the section on how the impact of the global economic slowdown has been felt on migration to NZ.
In a very ‘we’re better than anyone else in the world‘ manner, it’s pointed out that every other country in the world has had to take action at a policy level to stop the flow of migrants into their country. But since INZ are so good at their job, and the NZ policies work so well, NZ hasn’t had to do that. It’s all labour market driven, and with more Kiwi’s competing for jobs, fewer migrants get those jobs.
Which is exaclty what happens in other countries, you don’t give temporary work visa’s to migrants to do jobs, since the locals are getting those jobs.
Then three pages later they actually say that NZ did make policy changes;
Taking some occupations off of the skills shortage list. Just like the UK, USA, Ireland & others.
They then forget to mention that they [INZ] have made it more difficult to renew temporary permits, just like other countries.
Although it could of course be argued that INZ refusing to renew a permit and people being forced to leave isn’t limiting the possibility to renew a permit, it’s just stopping it dead.
So beyond the spin, INZ is doing a job just as effective as any other country.
Which then leads us neatly into another interesting finding about the number of temporary vs permanent visa’s INZ has been issuing.
3. While some of the numbers vary in the report, and I’ve not quite got my head around why that is, the vast majority of people who were granted residency in the last couple of years previously held another type of temporary permit, such as Student or Work. What this means is that less people currently outside of NZ are being granted residency before they get here. On the latest numbers, look at figure 5.2, 81% of all successful residency applications are lodged within NZ.
Back when we applied you could only get residency with a job offer in hand, and then they relaxed the rules a little, so people got residency without job offers. While that still may be happening, INZ appear to be giving out more temporary visa’s to people, who are then told to come to NZ, try their luck and get a job..
Very Dangerous for the migrant in our opinion!
Because of course if you can’t find something, then tough, and you have to head back to your home country. INZ wrap this up in a nice little bow by saying they are allowing immigrants the ‘opportunity’ to labour market test their skills. i.e. your problem, your risk, that’ll be a temporary visa fee thanks, and another permanent visa fee if you are lucky enough to get a job.
And by the way, aren’t out policies great because they minimise effort required by Govt. to respond to changes.
4. There’s a lot more family members coming in from China. With China being the largest source of Parent/Sibling sponsorship & uncapped family (partners of Kiwi’s) applications. With the high number of Chinese students studying in NZ, I feel the only surprise is that it’s taken this long to notice that a lot of them were bringing their family over. After all, it’s a (relatively) quick and risk free method of migrating the family out of China. Study here for a few years, work part time, you’ve then got a degree & NZ work experience, get your permanent residency and sponsor the family in a few years time. Mum & Dad don’t need skills, or lots of money to invest in a business to get them over here, and the youngling has had a great experience leanring to live away from home in another culture.
All round good for them, and well done on making immigration policies work for them.
5. There’s finally another admission that the main interest with foreign students studying in NZ is the income NZ derives from them. Education, when classed as an export (same as tourism is classed as an export) is now one of NZ’s top five export industries. (Dairy is joint first with Tourism, with Meat & Mineral fuel exports being 3rd & 4th respectively).
Which would explain why anyone can give advice to a foreign student, you don’t have to be a licensed Immigration Adviser to do that - it’s ALWAYS about the money.
6. Figure 3.5 on p25 makes for some interesting study.
Arrivals (i.e. returns) of Kiwi’s to NZ has stayed approx the same, in a 10k band.
Arrivals of non-Kiwi’s has trippled in the same time.
Departures of Kiwi’s has fluctuated a lot, however remains consistently higher than arrivals(returns).
Departures of non-Kiwi’s has remained relatively flat, and it’s only in the last few years that the number has increased, to the point where it’s almost as much as Kiwi’s returning to NZ.
All four numbers taken together give you the view of net migration.
So if you step back from the hullabloo about the percentrage of migrants who don’t stay in NZ, and look at the raw numbers, there’s still a much greater number of Kiwi’s “buggering off” from NZ than non-Kiwi’s. More detail on the source countries for those migrants who are absent is included in Appendix D of the report, and makes for some interesting reading again.
7. By the numbers, China has the highest absent number of 14,868 (25%), while the UK is 2nd with 14,650 (only 16%). By the numbers, that accounts for a third of all the absent migrants. It would be interesting to see what would happen to the NZ economy, job market etc. if all those from the UK or China who were entitled to be here actually returned.
8. table 3.4 provides a year by year view of those absent from NZ. I’m sure I saw a nice chart of this somewhere, but can’t find it now, so we’ll stick with showing you the table.
This shows, the longer you’ve been in NZ, the higher the chance that you’ll leave next year. It is worth noting that those who have come here via a family category, are much more likely to be here in a few years time. Although the numbers don’t say whether the numbers of family sponsored people staying has a link to the original sponsors also staying, it would make sense. I just don’t have the linked numbers to prove it.
9. Figure 6.5 is also curious, more for the information about ‘other’ which is absent.
We look at the settlement regions of migrants to NZ. Auckland accounts for about 44%, with the rest of the country getting the remaining 56%. However, if you add up the numbers, you find that after the top five regions, there’s another 17% of migrants unaccounted for – which would make ‘other’ the 2nd largest settlement region for migrants in NZ. While we don’t have a clear citation for where this graphic comes from, you could probably find out through one of the Longtitudinal studies that StatsNZ carries out. I’ll have a dig around and see what I can find.
So there you go, a slightly less interesting report from Immigration. Chock full of numbers. If only INZ treated all their clients like this, it would be a much more friendly and personable dept. Oh, wait a minute, silly me, they do. We’re all just statistics.
Well I never: An interesting Immigration report
Filed under: Getting to New Zealand, Hubby's Views, Life in New Zealand, NZIS & Immigration issues
So fair play, reading through the two reports from Dept. of Labour has actually been interesting. Well written, with conclusions and recommendations, not just dry statistical facts.
Something interesting from INZ/DoL for a change. Whatever next, Winston Peter’s as Immigration Minister? - Well stranger things have happened!
Seriously, the two reports;
International Migration Outlook & Migration Trends & Outlook sound similar – and to be honest there really isnt much difference (but hey – its waste some extra tax money writing 2 reports instead of one.)
Both are well written, and for a change have dozens of citations. So you can actually check where they are getting some of their facts from, and that they aren’t lying through their teeth. I was pleasantly surprised to find most of the cited reports are publicly available too. So you can read & draw your own conclusions.
Anyhow, interesting things/facts/observations from the IMO;
23% of NZ’s resident population as of June 2009 were not born here – and that number has been going up. Here’s a table showing where that 23% came from;
If you look at the ‘working age population’ that 23% turns into 25%.
This means that more migrants are staying in NZ longer, it’s now only 24 leavers for every 100 new migrants during the 2001-2006 period. Which, as we’ve mentioned earlier, is actually showing more loyalty to their new home than the 40%-ish of Kiwi’s who leave.
The employment numbers are a little worrying;
Unemployment rates for immigrants are about 3% above the national average. Perhaps not surprising with plenty of migrants coming in as Skilled Migrants or on Work To Residence without job offers.
New migrants are paid $10k-$15k less than their previously resident Kiwi colleagues.For performing comparable work
And it ‘only’ takes 15 years for that gap to close! 
15 years! OMG, you gotta be kidding? Come to NZ, take a huge pay cut, and if you’re lucky, you’ll earn the same as your colleague in a mere 15 years. humpfhh.
Still this may have something to do with another finding. That there was no evidence from another Dept. of Labour report that migrants were choosing to settle in an area which had higher than national average salaries, or lower than national average unemployment. i.e. new migrants weren’t actually picking the geographical area’s with fewer people having the in demand skills. hmm, perhaps we were just a little strange that way. We came to Wellington because the pay is better and its where the demand is – mostly because its where the government is. Most migrants still gravitate to Auckland, where the wages are lower and house prices are higher. Take note!
Wowing an potential employer at interview is going to do you a lot better than hoping that ‘averages’ will mean you get a better salary. Clearly some of this report points to studies showing that isn’t the case and you’ll get less than the average of your new Kiwi colleagues.
Time to brush up the interview skills.
Of course if you bring kids over with you when you migrate, then they don’t have to work to close that 15 year gap. The study showed that 18 year olds entering the work place faced no discrimination over salary whether they were Kiwi born & bred, or had arrived the day before their 18th birthday. So that’s reassuring.
There is also a (brief) section on the economic impacts of immigration. Only based on one study mind you. Basically, immigrants are good for the economy. In ‘productive’ terms;
- Migrants bring cash which they spend (really?! – you don’t say),
- Pay more in taxes to Govt. than they draw in benefits (shock horror, migrants aren’t here to sponge off the state!)
- Migrants reduce production costs (read as: are forced to accept lower wages)
- Improve the competitiveness of NZ goods & Services, which helps exports. (same as above really)
So I’m not so sure that this study really does justice to the ‘immigrant’ contribution to the NZ economy. I wonder if they actually asked migrants what their ‘contribution’ was?
Fascinating numbers
Filed under: For the numpties amongst us, Getting to New Zealand, Hubby's Views, NZIS & Immigration issues
Well, okay, perhaps not for a lot of people. However, I’m one of those sick puppies (meow) who finds spreadsheets and numbers quite fascinating when they tell you something interesting.
So much to my surprise, we found at the weekend that Immigration now have a statistics page on their website. Seems to have been there for a while too. So kudos to INZ for releasing the information as part of open Govt.
So what can these numbers tell us?
Well for starters download the Excel files, since you can play with the numbers. Thankfully someone at INZ knows how to use Excel and has created lots of pivot tables – yippee. Although they’ve not created enough graphs I think. Graphics, pictures, we need to see more coloured lines.
So, if you really want to find out how many parents, originally resident in the UK made an application for NZ residency, via the London branch in a random month anytime in the last 14 years – you can! Download R6 – Residence applications accepted for processing.
Want to know how many of those people applying got approved or declined? – Download R2 Residence decisions by month.
Of course, it may have been too simple to put all those numbers into a single spreadsheet. Still, the info is there.
So you can indeed see how many people applied from each coutry, broken down by month, and which stream, whether they were primary or secondary applicants, and whether they got accepted or not. There’s loads more statistical info buried in them thar’ numbers, so I may start coming out with interesting factoids. Personally, I’m interested to see if anyone from a ‘first world’ country managed to get into NZ via the ‘humanitarian’ stream – normally reserved for refugee’s of the non-economic variety.
Of course more really interesting stuff is buried in R8 – Residence applications on hand. INZ talk a lot about having a large workload, lots of decisions to make etc. Which they do. How much of a workload is this? Well take a look at R8, these are all the applications that people have made to come to NZ. Whether or not INZ have even started working on the application or not. One of the few graphis provided in the three noted sheets is below, ranging from July 2000 on the left through to January 2010 on the right. {you can click on the image to load it full size}
Uncapped family sponsorship (non-Kiwi family of Kiwi citizens) has grown steadly since 2000 from approx 3,000 to almost 7,000 per year.
Parent & Adult sibling capped family sponsorship applications have gone from ~4,500 to ~10,500 – with no change in the number of places made available. And anyone wonders why there’s a queue?
For a big wow!, the Business/Skilled migrant stream peaked at a queue of ~51,500 applications at the end of 2002.. Dunno what happened there, but I’m sure gonna go find out.
Stay tuned for more (possibly useless) interesting factoids.
Adding Insult to Injury.
So, the Immigration advisors licensing act (IALA) is designed to stop people like me “harming migrants” with our advice – because of course our experience is going to be much more harmful that getting screwed out of thousands of pounds by crap agents.
So it was with a mix of incredulity, hilarity and disgust that I received a comment the other day from a different government department asking me to put their link on my blog so that my readers could access their site and gain “information galore” about immigrating to New Zealand.
Apparently – while one government department wants to send me to jail if I give advice because it will “harm migrants”, another government department wants to use my blog as free advertising despite the “harm” I have apparently done by giving said free advice.
At least they are consistent in being bloody hypocrites.
Obviously I refused to allow the comment, but sent a polite email:
Dear Sir,
It is against our policy to allow advertising on our website in the form of comments.
However, should you wish to advertise, please let us know and we can discuss suitable rates.
Please bear in mind that any advertisements need to adhere to the IALA and not in any way be able to be constituted as Immigration Advice.
Thank you very much for your interest in Avalon’s Guide.
I haven’t received a response.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
Immigration reports x2
Filed under: Getting to New Zealand, Hubby's Views, Life in New Zealand, NZIS & Immigration issues
The Dept of Labor have actually come out with two reports on migration, as a contribution to some OECD studies.
It’s possibly sad that I’m working my way through both of them at the moment. At 62 & 125 pages I should at least get some sleep, even if it takes longer to finish reading them.
My first question will be what’s the difference between;
International Migration Outlook
&
Migration Trends & Outlook
‘cos I sure can’t tell the difference first off. Still, why publish one paper using a set of research when you can publish two? It’s at least efficient if the reports have completely different purposes.
So I shall work my way through the reports. There’s some fascinating info buried in the tables and numbers already.
Still, it’s an excuse to swan off to the beach and read the paperwork in some sun 
The UK State Pension – what happens to it when you emigrate.
Filed under: Avalon's Money Thread, Cost of living, Future Finances, The Book
This is something that I’ve actually had a lot of emails about recently, so I thought I would write a little about it and there seems to be some really whopping great misconceptions out there.
The main thing you need to understand is that you cannot double dip on your state pensions. You do not have the right to take a UK state pension and add it to any New Zealand superannuation you may be entitled to.
You just can’t.
If you choose to take the UK pension you are entitled to – it gets taken straight off any Superannuation you would get. There is a chapter in Avalon’s Guide explaining the nuts and bolts – but this is the bit you need to understand.
- If you are currently receiving the UK State Pension, the amount of pension you will get is frozen at the level it is when you become a resident of New Zealand.
- If you emigrate, and then later become eligible for the UK State Pension, the amount is frozen at the level it was when you left the UK.
- Any UK State Pension that you do get will be taken off any New Zealand state Superannuation you may be entitled to.
- This means that you cannot claim the UK state pension and add it to the New Zealand Superannuation.
- You can continue to contribute to the UK State Pension while you are resident in New Zealand if you wish.
- Any contributions that you make will increase your UK State Pension.
- Remember though that any increase you do gain will simply decrease the amount of New Zealand Superannuation you are entitled to.
As far as I’m personally concerned, I have not been expecting a state pension for the UK government since I was about 20 years old. The pensions system in most western countries is bankrupt, and there just isn’t the money to keep paying it.
You should also be aware that the National Insurance you pay in the UK is not being used to fund your retirement. It’s paying for the pensions of the people currently receiving a state pension. Your pension needs to be paid by future taxpayers. Thus the problem – there aren’t anywhere near enough people to pay it. The number of pensioners is growing, and the number of taxpayers isn’t growing anywhere near as fast.
And it’s no better here in New Zealand. As Gareth Morgan (an investment provider and somewhat annoying “guru” and “commentator”) says in his book Pension Panic:
If you think the government is going to keep you in the style to which you have become accustomed once you’ve retired, think again – unless you’re on the breadline now.
I just wanted people to be aware that this information is out there, and while I probably wasn’t able to think of everything that should go in a book about finances and emigrating to New Zealand, I really did think of most things. If you want to be prepared and not face these shocks, then read it. It may not always be fluffy – but it will mean you are prepared.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
How many Migrants leave New Zealand?
Apparently almost 20% of people who got residency in New Zealand between 2002 and 2008 have packed up and gone elsewhere.
Missing Migrants
Long-term absence for migrants approved for residence between 2001 to 2008 (top 10):
1. Taiwan: 2679 / 50 per cent
2. Hong Kong: 1132 / 40 per cent
3. Singapore: 1107 / 37 per cent
4. Indonesia: 1160 / 31 per cent
5. Canada: 1204 / 30 per cent
6. Malaysia: 2593 / 29 per cent
7. United States: 3511 / 29 per cent
8. Pakistan: 527 / 26 per cent
9. China: 14,868 / 25 per cent
10. Somalia: 519 / 25 per cent
21. United Kingdom: 14,650 / 16 per cent
22. South Africa: 6022 / 16 per cent
Total: 83,983 / 19 per cent
So – good news if you are emigrating for the UK or SA – looks like you are more likely to stay. Bad news if you are from Taiwan – you have a 50% chance of going back.
Unfortunately the article does say why people leave – except to speculate that people do their 2 years to get their IRRV and then bugger off to earn some real money so they can then fleece the free education system and wonderful healthcare and retirement system.
Theres no mention of people having to leave due to stupidly low wages and inability therefore for their families to have a decent standard of living.
What makes these figure really interesting – is it actually looks at people who have been granted residence – so actual immigrants – who leave. The more commonly seen figures are the net migration figures – which show how many people enter NZ vs how many leave. But that mixes up migrants and kiwis leaving. These figure show exactly how many immigrants turn round and go back home. It doesn’t however show how long they stayed – or whether they got the IRRV.
Despite not residing in New Zealand, these absent permanent residents – whom migrant advisers say were granted residency mainly through the business stream – will still be eligible for health and education subsidies should they decide to return.
Should they maintain their residency status, their children could also be entitled to New Zealand residency, which will make them also eligible for these subsidies.
Migrant advisers have raised questions whether this allows migrants to use New Zealand as a “second option” for retirement, as a springboard to Australia or use its services without contributing to the economy.
Of course completely ignoring how much money they coughed up to NZ to get here, including getting fleeced by so-called “advisers”.
This is where these articles are going a bit off the rails. Migration is often a give and take scenario – especially here in New Zealand because it actually has tough entry requirements. In order to get that IRRV and get those “subsidies” these people have to bring in a lot of money, and employ New Zealanders. Many Skilled Migrants have to live on subsistance wages to make that 2 years. They actually do contribute a huge amount – and put up with just as much and for migrant “advisers” to be spouting this kind of rhetoric speaks volumes about why they should not be given the veneer of respectability that comes with licensing.
Why the hell shouldn’t migrants come here, get their IRRV’s and then go elsewhere to earn a decent wage and then come back. If New Zealand really wants to change this – then maybe it should stop telling migrants they can’t earn much money here because they are foreigners and aren’t worth that much.
Just a thought.
Sometimes the solution to a problem is very simple. It doesn’t take a huge amount of hand wringing and high-level government law changes. Usually it requires no more than the application of (un)common sense.
Dr Coleman said the OECD has recognised New Zealand did as well as Canada and the US, and better than European countries, at retaining immigrants.
“Research shows that in general, business migrants are focused on establishing successful enterprises in New Zealand, and that they tend to be more profitable than similar-sized New Zealand firms.”
So possibly when you look at the global situation – there isn’t really a problem at all? Fancy that.
But business analyst Keng Lim says the fact a fifth of immigrants chose overseas showed they are not committed to New Zealand, and wanted permanent residency only as a “stand by option” or for “personal gain” – such as sending their children to New Zealand schools as domestic students.
The highest levels of resident absenteeism are from Taiwan (50 per cent), Hong Kong (40 per cent) and Singapore (37 per cent). At the other end of the scale were Tonga and Afghanistan (both 5 per cent).
“It shows that migrants from richer countries want residency so they can send their children here for free education, and hold on to their residency as a retirement option, rather than wanting to actively contribute to the economy,” said Mr Lim.
“With the high taxation here, many know they are better off elsewhere, but being able to get an indefinite residency makes New Zealand more attractive than Australia.”
I do wonder sometimes if these people actually know New Zealand at all. For a start – Taxation in New Zealand is actually not that high. It’s a LOT lower than UK levels for a start. And why do people think that you would want to fleece the system for a “free” education system that many people here are embarrassed by – and isn’t at all free anyway. It’s like saying we would come here for the benefits system – which is pants compared to what you could fleece the UK taxpayers for.
He said some would also use their New Zealand residency as a way to get into Australia.
Yes – and many people get residence in Australia just so they can get into New Zealand. We were advised to do just that seven years ago. By NZIS staff. Says it all really.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
