2. JOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does she stand by her statement that “When I am looking at year after year after year of positive net migration to New Zealand, I know this country is very capable of attracting and retaining its best and brightest.”?
How can New Zealand be “retaining its best and brightest” when 81,000 people left New Zealand last year to live permanently overseas—the biggest annual exodus since 1979—and is she telling New Zealanders that that is all OK as long as 82,000 people turn up in their place?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I am surprised that the member has raised the question today, because the net migration figures most recently received actually show an improvement on the month before. So that is positive. I note that although in the year ended July this year net migration was positive 5,201, in the 1999 year, when National was responsible, net migration was negative 11,369. We inherited negative net migration from the National Government.
Can the Prime Minister explain, then, why under Labour the average net loss of people each year to Australia has been more than double what it was under the previous National Government?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I also point out that in 8 of the 9 years that the National Party was in office, there was a net loss to Australia—a very, very big net loss at that. In case the member has not noticed, I tell him that Australia is undergoing a minerals extraction boom, and that means it is bringing in labour from many places. But the member is obsessed with Australia. We look at overall net migration: it is positive under Labour; it was negative under National.
What does the Prime Minister think is the main reason that 46,000 people left New Zealand for Australia in the last 12 months? Is it the relative state of the two economies, as she used to say?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
I repeat what I just said: Australia is undergoing a minerals extraction boom, which is attracting labour to those states where it is happening—not only from New Zealand but from states within Australia that do not have that particular boom. Of course, I am always interested in what will lure people back to New Zealand. My eye did alight upon this statement: “It’s not the wages that lure young people back here from their OE, more often it’s the open spaces, easily accessed beaches and native bush.”
Hon Jim AndertonIs the Prime Minister aware that the mineral sector makes up only 7 percent of Australia’s economy, and is she telling us that if she does an analysis of the people who left, she will find that the 46,000 who went to Australia last year are accounted for by its minerals boom alone? That is not what the statistics show.
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
It might be of interest to the member that every year about 1.3 percent of the Australian population leaves Australia to go and live somewhere else. We are a much smaller country, so the chances are the proportion leaving would be higher—and it is a little higher, at 1.7 percent. But, obviously, the member misses the point that there is a global labour market for skilled and unskilled people, and many people are moving in many directions around the world, including to and from New Zealand.
Why does the Prime Minister not accept that the reason why so many Kiwis are flocking across the Tasman to Australia is that Australian wages are rising rapidly, and that the previous Liberal Government spent 7 of the last 9 years cutting taxes, while her Government sat around for 9 years doing nothing, until election year?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
Of course, Australian wages now have a chance of rising, because the Employment Contracts Act - lookalike policy that the last right-wing Government in Australia had has been chucked out by the Labor Government. Mr Key’s policy is to bring back Employment Contracts Act - like provisions and to have our workers unable to negotiate the wage rises that are their due.
Can the Prime Minister confirm for the country, then, that losing 81,000 people overseas, which is the worst figure since 1979, and losing 46,000 people to Australia, which is the worst figure since, I think, about 1979 or 1980, is all OK by her, that it signifies that absolutely nothing is wrong, and that there is no need for change?
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK Link to this
What I focus on is net migration figures. As I have pointed out before to the member, firstly, net migration is positive, and, secondly, the permanent and long-term arrivals in New Zealand actually have higher skill levels than the permanent and long-term departures. There is a brain gain going on.