# Questions about NZ for Expats



## ozmigration

Hello, Have read few articles and wish if anyone expat in NZ help me with it.

I have found out, that more than 160000 New zealanders move every year to OZ for work and settle there mostly, that surely means NZ has scarcity of jobs and the country isnt growing anymore.

Maori groups have major conflicts with white people and i read article which says NZ future is not so good, as maori group trying to take back their rights

I think of NZ as beautiful and lovely country, does it really have all these problems.

Would you advice anyone to migrate to NZ or no.

Thanks


----------



## anski

ozmigration said:


> Hello, Have read few articles and wish if anyone expat in NZ help me with it.
> 
> I have found out, that more than 160000 New zealanders move every year to OZ for work and settle there mostly, that surely means NZ has scarcity of jobs and the country isnt growing anymore.
> 
> Maori groups have major conflicts with white people and i read article which says NZ future is not so good, as maori group trying to take back their rights
> 
> I think of NZ as beautiful and lovely country, does it really have all these problems.
> 
> Would you advice anyone to migrate to NZ or no.
> 
> Thanks



Hi,
firstly welcome to the forum. To give you the short answer NO NZ does not have all those problems, although disgruntled individuals will tell you it has.

People move around freely today, for various reasons to see more of the world, gain new experiences, expertise.

I have lived in over 10 countries not because I found fault with any of the countries but merely because of dual nationality I have access to live or work in many countries and because i love to travel & experience new cultures.

It is normal for Australian's & New Zealander's to move freely to & fro & then they often spend a period of time working in further a field but many return home.

I am not sure of the figures but I feel they do not represent a true picture.

As for your statement about Maori's -not true. They have & still are receiving compensation for lost land. But the aborigines in Australia have had land rights restored so no different. 

NZ does not have a scarcity of jobs in fact there is a scarcity of people to fill skilled positions.

Take your time to search past threads for more information. These loaded questions often result in slanging matches & I don't want it to end up that way.

Anski


----------



## Marianne2010

The Internet provide lots of information, but as with everything on the Internet it can be accurate or not. The "what do you think about NZ?" question raises always the same reactions:
1. the disgruntled ones: Kiwis having fled the country, expats not adjusting to the change etc
2. the enthusiastic ones: people that adjust well or Kiwis in love with their country etc
Probably you will find the same reactions by the same type of people whichever country you're looking at for a move.
So the advice, for me, remains the same: you plan to live there permanently? Go and have a serious look! Do not judge by contributions on forums or by data on the Internet that you cannot verify.
You never know the people contributing on forums: are they young and bold? In which area do they work? Where do they live? What do they like? Are they outdoors fans? Nobody is a clone to somebody else...
It's YOUR life you're changing, not theirs. So take a plane ticket, spend some real time there, talk to people, dig the truth out and decide!
After making about 18 months of research on the Internet, at the library, by reading the Kiwi newspaper, watching the Kiwi TV, reading the Kiwi government statements, speaking with Kiwis living in my country, I went there for a while, I searched thoroughly, I talked to many kind of people and found out it was not for me, on my terms, mostly because of discrepancies between what I had read and heard and what I heard and saw when I was there. But it was to be expected: what you read and hear is second hand tainted compared to what you experience, and it's perfectly normal because you are different from other people.
So gather some information, yes, but as soon as you can, go and have a look.
Marianne


----------



## anski

Marianne2010 said:


> The Internet provide lots of information, but as with everything on the Internet it can be accurate or not. The "what do you think about NZ?" question raises always the same reactions:
> 1. the disgruntled ones: Kiwis having fled the country, expats not adjusting to the change etc
> 2. the enthusiastic ones: people that adjust well or Kiwis in love with their country etc
> Probably you will find the same reactions by the same type of people whichever country you're looking at for a move.
> So the advice, for me, remains the same: you plan to live there permanently? Go and have a serious look! Do not judge by contributions on forums or by data on the Internet that you cannot verify.
> You never know the people contributing on forums: are they young and bold? In which area do they work? Where do they live? What do they like? Are they outdoors fans? Nobody is a clone to somebody else...
> It's YOUR life you're changing, not theirs. So take a plane ticket, spend some real time there, talk to people, dig the truth out and decide!
> After making about 18 months of research on the Internet, at the library, by reading the Kiwi newspaper, watching the Kiwi TV, reading the Kiwi government statements, speaking with Kiwis living in my country, I went there for a while, I searched thoroughly, I talked to many kind of people and found out it was not for me, on my terms, mostly because of discrepancies between what I had read and heard and what I heard and saw when I was there. But it was to be expected: what you read and hear is second hand tainted compared to what you experience, and it's perfectly normal because you are different from other people.
> So gather some information, yes, but as soon as you can, go and have a look.
> Marianne


Well said Marianne,

One man's meat, another man's poison & just as well we do not like the same countries.

Anski

ps I used to live in SW France near Monpazier, good memories.


----------



## Darla.R

ozmigration said:


> Hello, Have read few articles and wish if anyone expat in NZ help me with it.
> 
> I have found out, that more than 160000 New zealanders move every year to OZ for work and settle there mostly, that surely means NZ has scarcity of jobs and the country isnt growing anymore.
> 
> Maori groups have major conflicts with white people and i read article which says NZ future is not so good, as maori group trying to take back their rights
> 
> I think of NZ as beautiful and lovely country, does it really have all these problems.
> 
> Would you advice anyone to migrate to NZ or no.
> 
> Thanks


Hi there Ozmigration, I'll try to answer your questions as factually as possible as I believe this will be the most use to you.

Last year 36,830 left New Zealand for Australia on a permanent or long term basis, which is quite a lot less than the 160,000 figure you mentioned. 

I think there are about 500,000 New Zealanders presently living in Australia and the rate at which they are moving over here is at a peak. Some move because of the more upbeat economy over here and some because of the effects of the Christchurch earthquakes and continuing after shocks.

* Scarcity of Jobs*
You'll need to read the government statistics web site for the full details but this is what Statistics NZ says about employment in New Zealand right now


> In the March 2011 year, the number of Full time equivalents and filled jobs remained flat at 1.32 million and 1.67 million, respectively. For the same period, full-time and part-time employment also remained steady at 1.09 million and 0.45 million, respectively.
> 
> In the March 2011 quarter employment increased by 30,000 to 2,214,000.
> Unemployment decreased by 2,000 to 155,000. The unemployment rate decreased to 6.6 percent. http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for...t/QuarterlyEmploymentSurvey_HOTPMar11qtr.aspx



New Zealand's unemployment rate of 6.6 % is higher than Australia's which is 4.9% 

Australia is moving towards full employment, NZ is still having problems. I think your chances of finding a job are greater over here than in New Zealand.

*Country's growth*
The International Monetary Fund recently slashed its forecast for New Zealand's growth to 0.9% this year. If the rebuild of Christchurch gets underway soon it could rise to 4.1% next year.

Australia's growth has also been curtailed by natural disasters but it will be sustained by mining and offset by private investments coming into the country. The IMF says it will be 3% this year.

Of the two economies, Australia's is growing faster and it is worth noting that it didn't go into recession during the GFC like Australia did. The resources boom will sustain it, whilst New Zealand only has the rebuild to look forward to.

*Maori groups and major conflicts*
Very complicated and yes, there is a lot of conflict and much of it goes on in the background. You only have to look at the disproportionately high numbers of Maori in New Zealand's prisons to see that there are great inequalities. I don't have time to get the figures right now but this from the United Nations gives you an indication of the scale of the problem



> The high rate of poverty and imprisonment among Maori and claims that the Government holds all the cards on Treaty settlements are likely to form the thrust of a United Nations report on the position of Maori.
> 
> UN special rapporteur on indigenous people James Anaya has also raised concerns about the proposed replacement to the Foreshore and Seabed Act, suggesting it may not go far enough.
> 
> Professor Anaya was in New Zealand last week to follow up a report by his predecessor, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, who visited in 2005 to report on claims that the act breached Maori human rights.
> 
> Prof Stavenhagen's report was highly critical of the act, which vested title to the beaches in the Crown, and called for it to be repealed.


Amnesty international have also criticised New Zealand's record on indigneous human rights, they also said that human rights in general were being eroded in New Zealand

You can read a summary of their report on the Amnesty International website 
Amnesty report reveals New Zealand?s human rights record eroding | Amnesty International

*Beautiful country*
Yes it is, without doubt, but it does have its problems. Some of them are fairly unique to New Zealand too because of its location and isolation, small population, lack of resources and its position on the Pacific Ring of Fire. The very processes that make it so beautiful can also be very dangerous - as we have seen in Christchurch over the last 8 months.


----------



## ozmigration

Thanks for your feedback everyone.

I have more insight about the facts now, thanks once again.


----------



## YoungsSpecialLondon

There certainly isn't major conflict between Maori and white people. There is no violence. There is political friction, however, this is pretty trivial. By and large, whites and Maori get along fine. There's plenty of intermarriage for example.

"Conflict" is pretty much restricted to people saying daft things on talkback radio.


----------



## anski

I beg to differ I have never witnessed any conflict between Maori & Pakeha during the time I have lived in New Zealand.

I live in a very affluent area of Auckland yet 2 streets away there are a numerous HNZ (Housing New Zealand) public houses that have been almost exclusively inhabited by Maori's for many years & no problems.

My friend lives in Hawke's Bay very near to where a large population of Maori gang members live & again no problems.
I have Maori & Asian friends. So we do intermingle.

Do not forget many present day New Zealander's have Maori blood. 

Prior to the 19th century New Zealand was only populated by Maori & Polynesians. 

As for the settlements under the Treaty of Waitangi a very complex situation which I have attempted to understand but it takes a lot of time to comprehend. However compensation to date is here, quite significant amounts have been paid.

Treaty of Waitangi claims and settlements - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do not want to start comparing New Zealand with Australia which is not without it's own race problems & it would appear the same person who made remarks about NZ & the Maori's also made damming remarks about Australia & the aborigines.

UN rapporteur slams Aboriginal policies : World News Australia on SBS

James Anaya didn't pull any punches when describing the plight of Aboriginal people in Australia after a two-week visit of the country, saying there's "entrenched" racism in Australia.

Anski


----------



## Darla.R

It does depend on what you mean by conflict though doesn't it.

I recall Helen Clark being reduced to tears by a hostile crowd at Waitangi in 2004 and Don Brash having mud thrown at him. Clark was so upset she never went again and even the amiable John Key was shoved and intimidated before he was rescued by diplomatic protection squad officers. 

Then there's people like the Maori activist and MP Hone Harawira who has made numerous racist rants and those infamous emails, which I won't repeat on here, but he did say he wouldn't feel comfortable if one of his children came home with a pakeha partner.

I don't know how other people feel about this but I took offense at being called a paheka. I'd rather not be categorised by the colour of my skin or my ethnic origin, nor do I care to do the same to others.

I went to New Zealand to become a Kiwi/ New Zealander, not to be what paheka translated into English meant. Despite all the modern day attempts to legitimise the word we all know what it really means.

Bu hey that's just me, other people may not find it offensive.


----------



## topcat83

Darla.R said:


> It does depend on what you mean by conflict though doesn't it.
> 
> I recall Helen Clark being reduced to tears by a hostile crowd at Waitangi in 2004 and Don Brash having mud thrown at him. Clark was so upset she never went again and even the amiable John Key was shoved and intimidated before he was rescued by diplomatic protection squad officers.
> 
> Then there's people like the Maori activist and MP Hone Harawira who has made numerous racist rants and those infamous emails, which I won't repeat on here, but he did say he wouldn't feel comfortable if one of his children came home with a pakeha partner.
> 
> I don't know how other people feel about this but I took offense at being called a paheka. I'd rather not be categorised by the colour of my skin or my ethnic origin, nor do I care to do the same to others.
> 
> I went to New Zealand to become a Kiwi/ New Zealander, not to be what paheka translated into English meant. Despite all the modern day attempts to legitimise the word we all know what it really means.
> 
> Bu hey that's just me, other people may not find it offensive.


I take no offence at being called a 'pakeha' - for the majority of Maori, it is not meant as an offensive comment, and for the majority of 'pakeha' is not taken as such. _All _non-Maori are Pakeha - see P?keh? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And on the conflicts between Maori & Pakeha front - you have mentioned the main combatant - Hone Harawira. But one man does not make a nation, and this one man is very much in the minority. I am working with a man of Maori descent, who lives in Hone Harawira's constituency. He can't stand the man, or his policies. And insists on calling him by his registered name at birth - John Hatfield. 

Many New Zealanders have Maori ancestry now (including my Cousins children) - and are proud of it. We have travelled all over New Zealand, including the areas with a high density of Maori population (including Northland, East Cape, Central District around Taumaruni) and have _never_ had a problem. Of course, we would not go into some areas of South Auckland - but then we wouldn't have gone into some of the more dodgy areas of London either. Common sense should prevail. 

At least the Maori who wish to speak out can in this country - and have had a voice and some say in their future since the Waitangi Treaty of 1840. See Treaty of Waitangi | NZHistory. That is more than can be said about the Aborigines in Australia. I was shocked at the way they are _still_ treated, and the attitude towards them by the majority of Australians.


----------



## Darla.R

I see what you're trying to say but that entry on Wikipedia is exactly what I meant by attempts to sanitise the word. Whilst there are Maori who vehemently disagree with Hone there are also those who support him, such is the nature of politics. Though he has embarrassed the Maori party, not so much for the sentiments he holds but for expressing them so publicly.


> Of course, we would not go into some areas of South Auckland - but then we wouldn't have gone into some of the more dodgy areas of London either. Common sense should prevail.


Of course it should, and one shouldn't judge a whole country by places like South Auckland, but the problems that exist there also exist in other towns and cities, just on a smaller scale.

So yes, I'd say there is conflict. I think that there is always conflict of this nature in countries where the indigenous population has been displaced by another. I'd like to see the names Maori and Paheka done away with and replaced with New Zealander.

Since you mentioned Australia so will I. I have definitely noticed that in Australia Kiwis do not refer to themselves as Maori or Paheka, they are first and foremost New Zealanders or Kiwis and they are very proud of that. It would be good if it could be the same back in New Zealand.


----------



## topcat83

Darla.R said:


> I see what you're trying to say but that entry on Wikipedia is exactly what I meant by attempts to sanitise the word. Whilst there are Maori who vehemently disagree with Hone there are also those who support him, such is the nature of politics. Though he has embarrassed the Maori party, not so much for the sentiments he holds but for expressing them so publicly.
> 
> 
> Of course it should, and one shouldn't judge a whole country by places like South Auckland, but the problems that exist there also exist in other towns and cities, just on a smaller scale.
> 
> So yes, I'd say there is conflict. I think that there is always conflict of this nature in countries where the indigenous population has been displaced by another. I'd like to see the names Maori and Paheka done away with and replaced with New Zealander.
> 
> Since you mentioned Australia so will I. I have definitely noticed that in Australia Kiwis do not refer to themselves as Maori or Paheka, they are first and foremost New Zealanders or Kiwis and they are very proud of that. It would be good if it could be the same back in New Zealand.


Ah - but Maori are not 'indigenous' - they are immigrants, just like the rest of us. It's just that they were the first immigrants to our beautiful land.

And you can be both 'Kiwi' and have a separate cultural/racial history.


----------



## Darla.R

They have been custodians and guardians of the land for many more generations than we more recent immigrants have. I would hope that has earned them the right to think of themselves as indigenous and I think it is fair to say they haven't done well out of colonisation - one example of which is the disproportionately high number of Maori in prison which I mentioned earlier.

Don't you think that in this modern age for people to still be referring to each other by their order of colonisation or indigenous nature is rather like British people calling themselves Romans, Norsemen, Picts and Gauls?

Would a One New Zealand policy work and shouldn't it be given a chance?


----------



## Darla.R

p.s. this would be an excellent thread for the Lounge don't you think? 

Can you move it over there?


----------



## topcat83

Darla.R said:


> p.s. this would be an excellent thread for the Lounge don't you think?
> 
> Can you move it over there?


No, because I think it's in the right place. This certainly isn't a 'light-hearted subject', is it?


----------



## Darla.R

It isn't. I said it would be good to have somewhere_ more_ lighthearted, but it doesn't have to be exclusively so.


----------



## YoungsSpecialLondon

Darla.R said:


> It does depend on what you mean by conflict though doesn't it.
> 
> I recall Helen Clark being reduced to tears by a hostile crowd at Waitangi in 2004 and Don Brash having mud thrown at him. Clark was so upset she never went again and even the amiable John Key was shoved and intimidated before he was rescued by diplomatic protection squad officers.


A fair comment, but you should remember that the OP asked whether there was "major conflict". In the general scheme of things, this means something between violent racial tension to civil war. The situation in NZ simply isn't anything like that. One might not even want to say that major conflict still exists between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, even though the situation there is far, far worse than between Maori and Pakeha (for want of a more convenient term).

I agree with you that the stoushes above have happened, but Waitangi Day does tend to act as a lightning rod. Even so, it's not nearly as bad as 12 July in Northern Ireland.

As for Harawira, he's just the local village idiot. Every country has one. The truth is that he's pretty marginalised even in his own party.

I find Nick Griffin in England much scarier.

The truth is that for most of the history of NZ, Maori have had much the worst in terms of public health, employment, crime etc. I don't think it is of any relevance that colonisation brought them lots of good things: during colonial times they were not treated equally under the law in many respects. That the likes of Harawira are scarce is a testament IMHO to their patience and to the efforts by the govt to put right the historical overhang that their previous treatment created.


----------

