Net migration fuelled population growth takes NZ's resident population to 4.79 mln at June with biggest growth coming in 15-39 age group

Fuelled by strong net migration New Zealand's population over the past five years has surged by nearly 390,000, which is more than the population of Christchurch city, Statistics New Zealand said.

In the year to June alone the population grew by 100,400, the biggest ever increase for a June year, lifting NZ's estimated resident population to 4.79 million. Net migration, being arrivals minus departures, contributed 72,300 people, with the balance of 28,100 stemming from natural increase, being births minus deaths. Statistics NZ said NZ's current gain from net migration equates to 15 people per 1,000 population.

The high net migration of recent years has been a key driver of both Auckland house prices and New Zealand's economic growth.

"Over the last five years New Zealand’s population grew by nearly 390,000, more than the population of Christchurch city, to reach 4.79 million in June 2017," Statistics NZ said.

Christchurch city's population stood at 375,000 as of June 1 last year.

Statistics NZ said roughly half of last year’s arrivals were in the 15-39 age group, with net migration of 50,000 among those aged between 15 and 39 years. This means the share of the population aged 15 to 39 rose to 34% this year from 33% four years ago. This is a reversal of a trend that saw a drop from 41% in the mid-1980s.

“Most migrants are arriving on short-term work and student visas,” Statistics NZ said. “However, many of them extend their visas, or transition to other visa types including residence visas. It makes sense to count long-term stayers as part of our population, rather than as short-term visitors.”

The 4.79 million total population comprises 2.36 million males and 2.43 million females, which is equivalent to 97 males for every 100 females. The median age for males and females is 35.6 and 38.3 years, respectively.

Economy 'locked in a volume game'

JBWere strategist Bernard Doyle last week highlighted that NZ's economic growth over recent years has been driven by population growth.

"The New Zealand economy appears locked in a volume game. Since the turn of the century, the economy has grown in size by around 50%. However most of the growth has come from more workers, working harder. The holy grail of prosperity, GDP per hour worked, has grown at a far less impressive 13%. In other words, only about a quarter of our growth has come from working smarter. More worryingly, GDP per hour stalled in 2012. So, for the past five years, all of our economic growth has relied on more people, working more hours," Doyle said.

"Of course, productivity growth has proven elusive in many advanced economies - it is not to suggest New Zealand is failing. However equally, it would be disingenuous to suggest our top quartile OECD growth rate is a mark of success. It really reflects a choice to utilise population to drive growth in a way most of our trading partners are not prepared to. Japan for example, which has similar per capita GDP growth to New Zealand, could conceivably achieve similar headline GDP growth if it chose to loosen its immigration policy," Doyle added.

See more on the influence of strong net migration on the housing market here and here.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment or click on the "Register" link below a comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current Comment policy is here.

109 Comments

up
36

Its just crazy and ridiculous ............ why were we not forewarned that this was the plan ........... to bring in such massive numbers ?

We would at least been able to make some investment decisions around construction, and target those areas of the economy likely to be affected by such huge inward migration

Instead we woke up to find horrifying immigration numbers being reported after the event , with all the consequences we now face including not enough houses for everyone , congested roads and straining infrastructure .

And what makes it worse w.r.t. planned inward migration .............. we are still like mushrooms , kept in the dark and being fed BS

up
46

Its a bit like throwing a party but forgetting to have any chairs in the house...its cool temporarily until people want to find somewhere to sit and then they start bickering and after a while decide the party sucks and its time to leave. In the mean time your own kids have to go and sit outside because its too cramped in the house - all the while you stay in the warm lounge sipping champagne thinking to yourself, isn't this splendid...

up
15

Brilliant analogy

Brilliant I_O

You forgot the part where there is no fence between you and the neighbour, Australia. People from the party spill over onto your neighbour's back yard and they are furious about it.

What house ???.

And during this time have we built and spent on new infrastructure in proportion to the growth. Eg have we built a couple of hundred thousand new dwellings to house them in?. Are labours policies much different from national on this.

@Rob regrettably your rhetorical question is spot on , there is no difference between Labour and National w.r.t. immigration

Boatman I thought you were wrong until I read Jacindas approach.

I still would not vote for labour as these guys started this mess, but Im doubly not voting for Labour now.

At least WP is consistent with immigration.

up
10

Mushrooms is what National calls kiwis Yes!
Look who they made PM a ponytail puller disgrace and next a retread PM who admitted fiddling his housing allowance !

New Zealand is the Diet coke of countries

Government does not "bring in" immigrants. If people don't want to immigrate to New Zealand, the Government can't make them. All Government can do, is set rules to determine who will be allowed to immigrate.

So if more people are immigrating than before, that might be either because:

- the rules have changed so that people who would not previously have been allowed in, are now being allowed in; or

- the rules have not changed, but more people want to come here and fewer people want to leave here than before.

Which is it?

Could both.
Or could be an even greater degree of cheating. More people with $20,000 buying their way in.

Your logic is flawed , while there may be more people wanting to come here , it does not mean we must just open the floodgates .

We need to allow the number of migrants in with the following features or attributes :-

They must fit in
In numbers we can house
Assimilate
Contribute the most to GDP
and it would be good if the spoke English or Maori

There are some catagories we dont want .

We are full of $2 shops , we have enough dairies , we have enough nail salons and hair salons , and we have an oversupply of taxi drivers .

You clearly don't actually know anything at all about the immigration requirements.

Whatever the requirements are they are rubbish.

Make it easy then set a limit remove students can work, and remove the jobs part. Once your finished education you can go. It shouldnt be education for residency, that is just plain bad. Plus all the other loop holes. Its to complex.

Who really cares whether we understand it, cut immigration down. A city the size of CHCH.

Vote for Winstone.

Government does not "bring in" immigrants...All Government can do, is set rules to determine who will be allowed to immigrate.

I hope you don't actually believe Boatman was meaning the government imports migrants in / provides their transport into New Zealand?

Kinda meaningless distinction you're making there...Either the government is in control of the situation or they're not. Which is it?

Still not too late. Election not far away.

Think and Vote.

up
18

Child birth is like everything nowadays; Outsourced. Time to shut the firehose off come election day.

Besides strain on infrastructure, jobs, housing, health and crime diversity also hurts social trust:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam#Diversity_and_trust_withi...

up
29

So we're working harder and longer, but not getting any wealthier and the place is getting more crowded by the day. Sounds like a 3rd world country to me.

I think NZ is a far stretch from being a 3rd world country.

If you need to be reminded what it's like living in a 3rd world country, then there are plenty of countries I can suggest you head for......

up
13

Of course NZ is not a 3rd world country. However our mode of economic growth is similar - that is high (relatively in NZ case) GDP growth, mainly driven by rapid population growth, being mostly wiped out per capita by rapid population growth.

really ? have you lived in a 3rd world country mate?
be careful what you wish for

Yes and I don't wish for it! - Its just our lazy government's policies may inadvertently be sending us that direction.

NZers are allowed to complain, it is their right and perogative. If anything we dont like, we have the right to vote for change. This is something that we dont like. We are going backwards.

For somewhere not too distant, may I recommend Port Moresby?

Aw no , we are hardly third world ............. have you been there ?

I'm not saying we ARE 3rd world but having spent time in the developing world I see we are suffering from similar problems of low productivity due to availability of cheap (somewhat) disposable labour. And the consequences of the path we are taking is starting to show.

Probably better to just say that we are heading down that track.

True. Unfortunately we are. But I believe that its never too late to take a different track to a different future.

No we are not 3rd World , but we are trying real hard to get there, by packing them in here

up
12

Even third world countries have their rich people in more "desirable parts of town". It is only a matter of degree as we have plenty of people who are living in what is as close to third world as it is to get without actually being in it.

the superiority feeling over so called 3rd world country is laughable as soon as you land in Auckland airport with only 45min free wifi

Hi PocketAces,

Absolute rubbish!

A very small minority of NZers live in conditions resembling what the majority of people commonly put up with in third-world countries.

How many NZers have to put up with no health service, no clothing, no running water, no toilet paper and no flush toilet?

Go live in a third-world country - with no social welfare system at all - and you'll soon find out how different conditions are from NZ.

I lived in the third-world for a number of years. Sure, we have fewer people without flush toilets, but I'm still concerned at the declines into similarities that I'm seeing happening here. Especially around inequality and reduction of social mobility and opportunity for those at the bottom, a growing power gap between rich and poor, increasing corruption, increasing exploitation of the poor etc.

Now which Party has had a consistent set of policies on this?

We are definitely going backwards Kauri, high immigration, low wage growth, high homelessness, hospital ques, increased traffic, reduction in productivity.

Hi swapacrate,

Hospital queues imply there are hospitals.

For goodness sake, in many third-world countries/communities, there are no hospitals and no health services!

People like you need to get real - instead of your tiresome moaning and whinging.

The current softening in the housing market might well be muted.

The impact of demographics combined with supply constraints is real enough.

Pointy as has been pointed out before - there may be a demand to be housed but that mean there is a demand to purchase a house. Where are these buyers going to get the money to by a house (i.e. a loan). I've asked this question before and you never answer. .

Oh I would take a look at the young age group of new migrants and say categorically a lot will use their NZ residency as a step to at least Australia.
I wouldn't be too worried about them all staying when a simple flight lands you in a country you can earn more and pay less to live !
New immigrants are motivated people They will do what is most advantageous

up
21

What a complete mess this government has created. Is some how this good in the long term for New Zealanders. Short term gain for a major problem in the long term, pressure on infrastructure, housing, hospitals and schools, low wages and high cost of living. Why are other countries stopping large immigration inflows and we have the flood doors wide open in NZ. Not good for future generations!

It says roughly half of last year’s arrivals were in the 15-39 age group, with net migration of 50,000 among those aged between 15 and 39 years. This means the share of the population aged 15 to 39 rose to 34% this year from 33% four years ago.

We no longer need to wonder why our youth are so disaffected these days.

That move towards younger arrivals seems to mean more singles and that leads to more marrying foreigners. There is one group of permanent residents we cannot control are those marrying/partnering NZ permanent residents and citizens [Uncapped Family Sponsored Stream] and this has gone up from under 9,000 in 2009 to 12,873 last year.
Does anyone know if they are Kiwis on OE getting romantic or recent immigrants going to their place of origin to look for a partner?

I would suspect that the vast majority are in the latter category. I think it is quite common practice among many migrant communities, particularly those where arranged marriages are the norm. Someone living in a developed country is a more desirable potential partner for many parents.

I suspect the answer is mixed. In the UK Caribbean men are 50% likely to marry a native POM but Caribbean women are 30% as likely whereas most other ethnic groups show much stronger preference for same ethnicity. Indians definitely prefer other Indians and I suspect they look at caste too. Speaking as a POM who has married twice with the 1st Celtic-French and the 2nd Melanesian I'm just happy anyone would take me.
I only raised the subject to prove that a so called zero immigration rate would still leave about 20,000 coming in every year (partners and refugees).

NZ youth can catch a flight out and get a job in many countries as long as they're under 35
NZ can import all the immigrants it can get but keeping them is another story when wages and salaries are lower than elsewhere and living costs are high. How many leave is the real question and who remains to collect NZ welfare benefits after qualifying with a useless degree from a kiwi university

population is still too low to support a sustained and broad based economy that can generate real competitiveness through technology and innovation on its own feet. About 1 million NZ passport holders are out of this island for better lives in the real world and the leftover is less energetic and stuck in the trap. This has been the trend for the last 40 years and will be the same for the next 40 years.

No,the problem is no matter how many people or how few, our system relies on it getting bigger all the time, we have to come up with something other than that now as can't keep doing that.

up
16

We're always going to be small and isolated but there is absolutely no reason we can't be reasonably wealthy and have a country and lifestyle that the rest of the world would envy. Even these high population growth rates would require generations to make any substantial difference to economic efficiency/diversity. Even Australia can't sustain a viable vehicle manufacturing industry for example. Flooding our country with bulk low grade immigrants is doing nothing to improve our living standards and the resultant wage and housing squeeze is unlikely to encourage our ex-pats back home.
For some our immigration is not enough even now. Look at this total fool at the Herald (Lifestyle reporter and would be immigrant himself,) telling us we have to take more or else:. "More immigrants are coming here than ever before and with no signs of slowing down, and given many of us will become future voters, restricting immigration is a great way to tank your party in the future."
Clearly too dumb to realize that he's not going to have a vote if he isn't allowed in in the first place which would be my preferred option.
Ben Mack; http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=119...

up
23

BTW, what is it with the Herald? Does everyone there have to write a pro immigration puff piece - no matter how ridiculous. Creepy!

This was on the radio news on the 8th - still no mention in the Herald - if untrue you would expect them to prove it and if true isn't it news?
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/336687/indian-businesses-sell-job...

up
13

haha. Funny.
You want The Herald to 'prove' something?
That ship sailed a long time ago. The Herald isn't interested in proper journalism anymore.

It should be! This will be common knowledge within the government (and opposition most likely). I know a number of people working for these tertiary institutions that have popped up everywhere and they have told me it is common practice and not even particularly well hidden. The employees at the institutions are often on working visas themselves so too scared to say anything.

up
11

Sickening!
You really do have to wonder how stupid it can get - New Zealand's immigration.service has now been outsourced to your local gas station or liquor store.

up
11

On RNZ this morning, the Pip Fruit Association (or whatever) was talking about, wait for it ... "... slavery in New Zealand..."
SLAVERY, IN NEW ZEALAND... where is the outrage? What is happening to my beautiful country?
Worst of all, the greatest concern was for the loss of overseas contracts rather than the human rights issue!

here listen for yourself -
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/middayreport/audio/20185464... Growers are told exploiting workers could cost overseas contracts.

I agree we cannot be too vigilant with regard to people trafficking, especially in the sex industry. We are seeing the pressure of a world wide resurgence of exploitation and slavery - and as it grows it will make it even to the ends of the earth.

The NZ Herald is reluctant to print anything negative about immigration but it does have its 'adult entertainment' section which must be the most ethnically integrated profession in NZ. Strange how many offering adult services are 'young new arrival from xxxxx' when we all know the only job restricted for holders of residency visas is the sex trade. To be fair the 'xxxxx' are both 1st world and 3rd world countries.

I had a friend (expat from overseas) who was here in NZ for quite a few years, and was a regular patron of the sex industry here (older man, no wife). He said the change in the industry was quite remarkable over the time he was here. Not only more international students etc. (contravenes their visas, but oh well), but also plenty more Kiwi girls getting into the industry. Perhaps ever-increasing student fees and costs of living are forcing more and more people into desperate measures...the older generations screwing the younger in more ways than one.

Brighter future and all that.

Ever wondered why many franchises are now owned by certain 'groups'? i'll tell you why. They are paying above market rates for these as their business case analysis when purchasing uses different inputs for labour costs.

Their labour cost are based on exploiting student visa labour, to an extent that they can pay well above someone following the rules. This is not speculation, twas from the mouth of a very senr govt official who shall remain nameless

Even worse, these guys are seen as succesfull new immigrant busines people by the people being exploited. Thus these new exploited workers are 'learning' that to get ahead in NZ, you do not play by the
rules.

Ever stopped to think about how this is changing the social culture of NZ? Slowly but surely the qualities of being a kiwi are being poured down the drain due to stupid short term immigration policy.

David George
So right Sir
Aucklands charm was it was relatively speaking uncongested if you drove at certain times
Filling Auckland with immigrants who will take decades to get with local culture isn't a panacea to prosperity
National just had decided they couldn't tell the voters what their massive immigration plan was !
You do know that if the same happened in many countries they'd be riots on parliament !?
Not in NZ because the politicians know kiwis don't rise up they just bleat

Have a look at the Harvard Economic Complexity Atlas - and where NZ ranks ( the Aussie ranking is even lower - snicker - they are below Egypt and Botswana ) . While NZ is OK we are still far below Japan.

http://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/rankings/

Too true David - I know of at least one brown skinned ethnic immigrant and now citizen who will be voting for Winston. Doubt she is the only one.

Our problem is the number of pencil pushers per capita. Do we really need councils requiring every bit of wood to be BRANZ appraised? Why not just use a set of global standards that work for our conditions.

So MRP what is your solution? Lift wages and opportunities to persuade those dynamic Kiwis to return or look for replacements from other countries? The 2nd choice has the problem that new residents with real talent are more likely to move on and join the 1 million overseas than those with more permanent roots. My worry is the ones with minimal special skills will be competing for low wages with my three adult children currently trying to find reasonable employment in Auckland.

The most simple solution for individual is to vote with feet. Life is too short for waiting for another harbour crossing in Auckland, right? Fast population at least will force govt to speed up with infrastructure and also encourage new players to enter the market for profit. Genuine competition will lower cost of living as a result. this is far better than lifting the wage. If increase is helpful why not set the min pay at $100/h? The world is getting more and more competitive everyday. Anyone is not lifting the game fast enough will be replaced by either outsider or technology created by those highly skilled overseas.

I've read the opposite argument that our rapid growth is making us less productive and less competitive. Businesses only have to stand still to keep ticking along. Investors put their money into property instead of exporting and technology businesses.
If each Kiwi has roughly one 5 millionth of the national assets which the dept of stats says is worth a $1Trillion then we each have $200,000 of roads, hospitals, schools, national parks etc. Each immigrant (I was one in 2003) is taking a share so to keep infrastructure up to standard we have to spend $200,000 per immigrant (that includes returning Kiwis) - this was no big deal while the number of kiwis leaving was balancing the new immigrants arriving.
Now when I sit in regular traffic congestion I curse the population growth that nobody planned for - sitting as the car idles I really don't care where the newcomers are from.

Lapun - what happened to the Bob Atkinson nickname class of 2003?

The health, wealth and happiness of a country's population has nothing to do with the number of people, possibly the less the better so why do people try and present it as a positive. The most desirable, wealthiest and healthiest counties are all western style liberal democracies with high levels of social cohesion, legal and property rights and low levels of crime - Switzerland or Norway for example. Get the essentials right and all else will follow. With our rather unusual economy we could very well find out that we end up a hell of a lot worse off in every way with significantly higher population.
The great Scottish historian Niall Fergusen distilled success down to six features: property and civil rights, science, competition, work ethic etc. - nothing to do with population. http://www.npr.org/2011/11/02/141942357/how-the-west-beat-the-rest-six-k...

Iceland - top of happiness rating, wealthier, and less dense population (317,351 people).
see http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/NZ/IS

That is because they have tiny little horses that can do this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7rWeWymJDw

There are also about one million people in nz not working and not considered by the statistics as unemployed, as they haven't actively seeked out a job in the last month. So the number of nzers needing a job are a lot higher than the stats show. Many business are actually looking for workers in the lower paying jobs, which aren't paying enough to support a mortgage on a million dollar average house. Nzers tend to strive to own, not rent, their house, so don't want a low paying job long term. Many of the million overseas will not be if working age anyway.

Rob , is this true because we have unemployment at just 4% which suggests that only about 100,000 to 120,000 between 18 and 65 are unemployed not 1,000,000 people ?

Where do these figures come from

I thought nearer 5% but happy to be corrected. If you work one hour per week you are not in the unemployed figures. On that basis the under-employed is about 12%. Some not employed but not registered as unemployed are pensioners and some 16 to 25 year old mothers.

And anybody whose partner earns above the threshold.

13,000 last year (26.9% of total) were in the 'Uncapped Family Sponsored Stream' which means Kiwis on OE or holiday finding a partner abroad or tourists falling in love with a Kiwi in NZ. I cannot imagine any government keeping a married couple apart. In this category all the applicant has to do is prove they are in a genuine permanent relationship. It is possible there are a handful of rorts but the Dept of Immigration does check this category fairly diligently which I wouldn't say for most of the other permanent residency streams.

Wether the figure is 4% 5% 6% or even 12% how many of these are unemployable?

Wether the figure is 4% 5% 6% or even 12% how many of these are unemployable?

The labour government started this is 2001. They panicked when they realized that if they didn't do anything, there would be not enough younger people to pay tax once baby boomers retired. The National govt concurred and kept it going.

up
11

Valid point. Although in recent years the tap has been left on full and the bath water is spilling over to the detriment of those living on the floor below. Our roading, housing, schools, hospitals have not kept up with the speed of mass immigration.

The government is currently trying to refurbish existing schools with the money that needs to be spent on building 'new' schools due to population growth.

It's interesting how the word 'PLAN' has been loosely thrown around in conversation. I'm afraid, this Govt including ACT, United Future and Maori have failed to set a target around population growth and have subsequently created issues that will be irreparable for decades.
100, 000 young people out of employment or training and 40, 000 living in below standard accommodation - a Venn diagram would show some overlap of the two.
I am amazed at the lack of leadership shown on this subject and perhaps someone could ask our PM what is our target around projected population growth?

It's been done here on interest.co.nz

It's going to all end in tears at some point.

Immigration to solve paying superannuation? The tears will be when they realise even immigrants can retire. I have.

That's a lot of chefs and restaurant managers

Does anyone ever check if they are still chefs and managers once they have permanent residence or do some settle down at a lower level and lower pay - especially those who start by paying over $20,000 to their employer to persuade our naive Dept of Immigration that they are skills worthy?

I know of one fellow who has just had to leave New Zealand to return to his home country, down $20k in school fees. He - admittedly, stupidly - was working for a restaurant on Auckland's waterfront, as a DJ being paid under the table (working out to be about $10 an hour), but his job title was something else for visa purposes. He was in a desperate position.

The restaurant was promising to support him for his work visa. Come visa application time, his IRD records were what caught him out - no record of wages, because he was being paid cash under the table. So, he's had to leave the country.

It's appropriate that he should leave, but it's also that that our hospitality sector had a good deal more investigation into it to establish what's going on. From his account, there were other workers in that restaurant who were being paid off the books and without a work visa. Meanwhile, the owners flash their wealth in a conspicuous fashion...

He and his schoolmates were also lied to outright about the nature of their school, and even its compliance with NZQA.

This is not the New Zealand I want. It's not the New Zealand I was raised to believe in and love.

Down $20k in school fees? how come? did he not get $20k worth of quality education? plus a heap of untaxed under the table cash

>"did he not get $20k worth of quality education"

LOL. That sort of thing is only a yarn Stephen Joyce likes to spin on the odd occasion.

He was making very little - $10 an hour, with only the hours a DJ typically works in a restaurant. (Restaurants don't have a DJ running all the time.)

And you know, bakers.

Cause we can't train chefs, bakers, baristas etc. in NZ. NOT!

up
15

Cowabunga ... Batman ! ...

... in the past 5 years we've allowed in enough immigrants to populate the whole of Christchurch City ....

And we've constructed enough accommodation to house a town with the population of Darfield ...

... luckily for the good folks of Darfield the 390 000 newbies mostly decided to descend upon Orc Land .... ha ha ... your problem !

up
13

Absolute madness. Just made my mind up not to vote National.

The problem is who to change to? Labours polices aren't much different. Maybe slightly less inflow, but for how long. It is a proven formula to make the books look good. The big problem is when the economy goes into recession, and unemployment jumps. We then have to support this extra population, which has grown on the back of the good times.

Agreed Rob , Labour's immigration policy is all but identical to National's

When Little was in charge Labour was promising to cut down on Work Visas and shut down the low-skill, low-qualification pathway to residency. Wouldn't surprise me if they backtrack on that now.

WTF? that is effectively a full 10% increase in population inside of 5 years.

Got to have that tax base to pay for the baby boomers retirement....

I also said WTF when I read this

Yeah, you see the year on year figures and think "that's big" but then you look at the full picture... and WTF?

5 more years until we hit 5 mil.
10-15 and we hit 6 mil.
by 2050 we will be close to 10 mil.

I am yet to see any growth predictions anywhere that have ever had this level of growth factored in.

Bill said it's "about right". I'm sure everything's fine.

Yes I have seen the projections - 10 million within 30 years and 25% of the population Asian or Indian.

NZ but not as we know it.

Little Britain.

I dont want to be Little Britain, I want to be NZ.

So ?

I suppose New Zealand has decided to follow in the footsteps of most major countries in allowing mass inflow of immigrants - Britain had two mass inflows allowing colonies to migrate in the 50's and 60's to rebuild their country. Then again in the 2000's with the expansion of the EU.
America would be lost without the Latino population, Mexicans in particular.
Germany put the hand out to Turkey post war and France did the same with their colony from Algeria.

In each of those countries there is a clear animosity towards immigrants and their beliefs.

NZ did the same in response to negative migration figures in 2011-12 following the earthquake in Christchurch and exodus of Kiwis to Oz.
Then our economy became "rock star" and everyone wanted a piece of the pie.
Unfortunately, the economy was based on QE from foreigners and low interest rates creating a boom in the housing market. This made everyone who owned a home feel rich again and start spending their "hard earned" cash.

However, as a nation productivity barely increased. More and more New Zealanders fell below a comfortable standard of living and we now own the title of highest rate of homelessness in the OECD.

So these numbers do not include short term work visas and student visas all of whom buy a car, rent somewhere, use the health system (prove to me they pay if they have to) , work (and according to migrant workers association get "conned" into voluntarily pay for jobs to get residency), sure spend some $$ but only what most have earned here (no genuine increase in GDP) - add how many hundreds of thousands to the population number??

If all the immigrants from the last 5 yrs were put in one place it would be NZ's 3rd largest city. A city with no houses, no schools, no roads, no hospitals, no electricity, no infrastructure!!!
That is one of the reasons NZ's dept has skyrocketed because the taxpayer is having to provide for this growth.
Economists then tell us the economy is good because its growing.
Our export income during this period has gone down, Our lifestyle has been damaged and our children have to pay for it with expensive housing and a huge dept to service.

A lot of commentators here say that the government is "bringing in immigrants" or that the government has "opened the floodgates". Can someone tell me what policies the government has changed to "open the floodgates and bring in immigrants". Not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely wanting to know what laws the government has changed, say around 4 years ago, to "bring in more immigrants" so that I have a vbetter understanding. Thanks

The government has not changed any policies Yvil to bring so many people in.
The point is they haven't changed any policies to reduce the flow of people coming in.
Immigrants like yourself who have been here a while are doing very well out of this population growth.
You don't have the depth of extended family or the childhood memories that grass roots Maori and Pakeha have.
When we go to family functions we are rubbing shoulders with family and friends who are the people suffering the poverty caused by this governments policies. We have family and friends who work hard and yet live from week to week wondering how they will afford school uniforms and pay the rent.
Many of the commentators on this sight make emotive comments that might not be technically correct but its the content that counts.

Well said, thanks NH

"Many of the commentators on this sight make emotive comments that might not be technically correct but its the content that counts."

I like this.

This is a little bit out of control isn't it?