|
You are subscribed as |
Unsubscribe
|
View online version
|
Forward to a friend
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Jason Krupp | Research Fellow | jason.krupp@nzinitiative.org.nz | ||||||||||||
|
Judging by Mr Peters’ comments on Facebook, which were re-published in the Indian News Link community newspaper, we have failed. Not only does it look as if the leader of NZ First failed to crack the cover of the report, but he also appears to be gathering his alternative facts from his local supermarket. Mr Peters’ lack of engagement was not entirely a surprise, especially as this report set out to debunk many of the myths surrounding the topic, and put the real facts of the matter on the table. Many of these myths are comfortable, such as migrants are to blame for the housing crisis in Auckland. Instead, our report showcased research showing that red tape, Nimbyism, and Kiwis choosing not to venture overseas have a bigger effect than foreigners on house prices. It also dispelled the notion that if a migrant takes a job it means one fewer job available for native born New Zealanders. The truth is that migrants are consumers too, and their demand for goods and services create opportunities for New Zealand businesses. Viewed this way, migrants can create jobs. We also found that while many people are concerned that high levels of migration will dilute New Zealand’s culture, most people who move here integrate well. They have good employment outcomes, low benefit uptake rates, and educate their children to a high level. In fact, almost 9 out of 10 migrants said they felt part of New Zealand. Seen from this perspective, it is obvious why we called the report The New Zealanders: Why migrants make good Kiwis. Based on the widespread media coverage and messages of support we have received over the week, many people agree with this sentiment. Mr Peters is clearly not a part of this group. But as Upton Sinclair said: “it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Martine Udahemuka | Research Fellow | martine.udahemuka@nzinitiative.org.nz | ||||||||||||
|
My misery: Trying to find a half-way decent, reasonably priced flat within walking distance to work that will not cost me an arm and a leg, during the busiest month of the year. And my company presented itself when I met one of my competitors at a flat viewing two weekends ago. As well as dealing with the agony of finding a place to live he had to consider the bureaucracy of getting into a popular school as well as the hefty premium on a flat. Because of maximum roll caps imposed by the Education Ministry he could not get his son in their preferred school as they lived outside its boundary. He had also missed out on the ballot. Sure there is a role for government in public education but it is worth asking whether someone sitting in central Wellington should dictate to which school a parent should send their child. Under the Education Amendment Bill 2015 matters were set to get worse for families. The Bill proposed greater powers for the Minister including fining schools that refused to erect a fence. Lucky the proposal was overturned. The current system still provides wiggle room letting willing schools stretch to accommodate students. By removing voluntary zoning, the proposed system was going to further stifle school autonomy and opportunities for poorer students. The intentions of zoning make sense. A school cannot be expected to take on an infinite number of students with finite resources. The set up also gives the local children dibs at the local school. It is a good thing the envisioned new powers were overturned but the existing fences still make the poor students who cannot move, the losers. But imagine if popular schools could set up offshoots in an area with fewer popular schools? What is worrying most about my competitor’s case is that his wanting to go to the popular college was based on the misconception that the school’s high decile necessarily means it is academically superior to the lower decile schools in his current neighbourhood. Worst case scenario is that he found his family a shoebox flat so his son can attend a school that ends up not being the best school for him anyway. On my part, I now have a 70-minute commute by car rather than the 10 minutes by foot I envisioned. But at least I do not have kids. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Dr Eric Crampton | Head of Research | eric.crampton@nzinitiative.org.nz | ||||||||||||
|
It’s almost always cheap talk. Uprooting your family to move somewhere else is a big decision, and a lot more expensive than expressing your outrage with hyperbolic statements. This time, it’s looking a bit different for non-citizens living in the US. The American government always made it pretty clear to non-citizens on visas, and permanent residents, that they are tolerated rather than welcomed. That looks set to get far worse. The weekend’s travel ban was bad and there is likely more to come. And New Zealand is looking pretty good by contrast. And so, here are a few helpful welcome tips to any new New Zealanders we might welcome from America.
|
||||||||||||
| On The Record | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| All Things Considered | ||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
Unsubscribe me please |
|
Brought to you by outreachcrm |