Dialogue: Change to immigration rules would bring Britons flocking to retire

By ERIC THOMAS*

We have to sell our New Zealand house, which we have owned and cherished since 1988, our furniture and our cars. Then we have to say our final farewells to our Kiwi friends.

The reason for this sad state of affairs is that my wife and I feel we can no longer face the 40,000km return flight to Britain every six months and New Zealand will not allow us to stay here permanently.

We are both British subjects but have no grounds for securing permanent residency. We do not qualify on compassionate grounds because we have no relatives in New Zealand. We are not political refugees, nor could we raise the sort of sum required to buy our way in as business immigrants.

All we have been offered is a possible extension to our six-month visas. If this were granted, we would not be allowed back for six months plus the length of the extension.

For some years, I have realised that there is a large and profitable market for New Zealand just waiting to be tapped. It would give a definite and much-needed boost to the housing, car sales and consumables markets, as well as increasing the flow of foreign currency.

The answer is the acceptance of retired immigrants.

If you are in any doubt about these benefits to a nation, just ask a Spaniard. British and other European retirees have flocked there in their tens of thousands. Spain has prospered greatly from this influx.

I can speak only of the British.

They have been attracted mainly by the climate and the low cost of housing, although the cost of living is not far short of that in their native country.

They emigrate to Spain despite a complete change of culture, having to cope with a foreign language and driving on the "wrong" side of the road.

New Zealand can offer those same people a climate similar to Spain's, and their own language, driving conditions and essentially the same way of life.

The natural concern of the past New Zealand Government and the present Immigration Service is the probable cost to the health service - a fully justified concern.

I have written to the Minister of Immigration, Lianne Dalziel. Supposing, I said, that applicants for retired immigrant status were covered in New Zealand for full medical insurance paid one year in advance with an internationally recognised health insurance company, and had to produce annual renewal receipts for inspections?

She replied, saying, in effect, that, in the case of disputes, New Zealand would have no jurisdiction over foreign companies.

A valid point, perhaps, but then I pointed out my second requirement, which would be that the applicant had to deposit a cash bond of, say, $25,000 to cover any unforeseen demand by any New Zealand authority which might arise. This bond would cover that contingency.

I have not received a reply.

Our health insurance costs us many thousands of dollars each year and covers us for both private and public hospital treatment.

The chance of permanent residence in New Zealand would appeal to a large number of Britain's retired. We have never met anyone in England who has visited New Zealand and did not want to return. The usual comment is, "if only it were closer and we could stay longer."

Just think, the Britons transferring capital and pensions to New Zealand would find the cost of houses, food, cars, car insurance and licences, petrol and diesel all less than half the price they pay in Britain.

Add to these attractions free local phone calls, no television licence, no capital gains tax and GST of 12.5 per cent, compared with17.5 per cent VAT in Britain. But probably even more important to the retiree is the friendly and helpful attitude of the Kiwis. New Zealand would, indeed, be the Brits' El Dorado.

The chances are that once these proposed immigrants had bought their New Zealand homes, they would be visited by friends and relatives, thereby contributing to tourist figures.

And, if our experience is typical, they, too, might well consider immigration once they have experienced the attractions of New Zealand.

I cannot visualise my scheme costing New Zealand anything except the set-up costs, which would be the expense of examining health insurance credentials and the annual payment receipt.

There would also be the cost of drawing up a standard legal document enabling any New Zealand authority access to the cash bond.

But would it not be worth the effort?

Here is the opportunity to welcome mature, financially independent, law-abiding citizens paying to live perhaps the last 20 years or more of their lives in New Zealand.

* Eric Thomas, an English businessman, served with many New Zealanders in the Royal Navy during the Second World War.