[ad_1]
The migrants who have made New Zealand their home are protesting “inhumane” proposals that would make older migrants wait 10 more years for NZ Super.
Hendrik Wentzel, an African-born Ballance Agri-Nutrients engineer, says his parents Jannie and Nicolette Wentzel allow him and his healthcare worker wife Sunel to make a contribution to the economy of their foster home.
Wentzel, born in Namibia, moved to New Zealand in 2007 from South Africa, and in 2015 they were joined by their parents, who are now in their 70s.
But the family’s financial planning is threatened by a proposed law change that would see the residency period for their parents to qualify for the overnight NZ Super change from 10 to 20 years.
READ MORE:
* Invercargill MP Sarah Dowie unexpectedly withdraws from Parliament
* If we depend on Chinese trade, can we speak out against China when necessary?
* Young people will pay the growing burden of retirement.
He says that if New Zealand’s Retirement and Retirement Income (Fair Residence) Bill were to become law in its current form, some older migrants already in the country would die before they were paid a NZ cent. Super.
The Wentzels and members of the Chinese immigrant community say the Fair Residence bill is not fair, though they support increasing the qualifying period for future migrants to 20 years, as the current period is low compared to other countries.
The Te Ara online encyclopedia lists anti-Chinese legislation. The last of the laws it lists was repealed in 1965.
Both Labor and National support the 10-20 year change, but even they have raised concerns about the harshness of the bill, which was introduced by NZ First’s Mark Patterson before losing his seat in the last election.
Patterson said it would save about $ 80 million in the first year and about $ 4.4 billion over 10 years, though those figures have been questioned.
A deputy told colleagues that the bill would disproportionately affect Chinese and Indian families.
Jannie Wentzel called the proposed law “unfair and unreasonable,” and said that when he and his wife emigrated, they did careful financial planning, keeping in mind the promise of NZ Super after 10 years of residency.
But his main objective in coming to New Zealand was not the NZ Super, but to support the family.
“Our main purpose of the emigration was to support our grandchildren and children who are New Zealand citizens and professionals. They both work long hours in important jobs that primarily contribute to the well-being of New Zealanders in general, ”he said.
In addition to working full-time jobs, Hendrik Wentzel and his wife were raising children and running a watersports supply company called Blue Mako, and their parents’ support for childcare had made this possible.
“The only reason they decided to join us in New Zealand was to support our aspirations and dreams in this wonderful place,” said Hendrik Wentzel.
SUPPLIED
Hendrik Wentzel with his wife Sunel, they can manage their careers full time and run a private business because their parents Nicolette and Jannie play an important role in helping raise their children Janique and Hendrik.
There was a tendency to view older people as an economic drag on the state, but that was wrong, he said.
“They allowed us to buy our first property … and they will continue to allow us to do more for New Zealand and its economy in the future,” he said.
Her father volunteered as a tennis coach at schools and her mother volunteered at a food bank, she said.
Like many who submitted submissions to Parliament on the Fair Residence bill, Hendrik Wentzel said he understood that changes were needed at NZ Super, but only for future immigrants.
When former Prime Minister Sir Bill English proposed raising the eligibility age for NZ Super to 67 in 2017, his plan was to scale the increase over time, so people would have time to adjust their financial planning.
Maarten Holl / Things
In 2017, Prime Minister Bill English campaigned to raise New Zealand’s retirement eligibility age to 67 by 2040.
When the eligibility age for NZ Super was raised from 60 to 65 in the 1990s, it was done gradually over several years.
After Patterson was removed, National Rep. Andrew Bayley took over the bill, but his party has reservations about the social justice of an overnight change.
At the first reading of the bill in July, National’s Paul Goldsmith said: “I think it would be pretty tough for someone who had been in the country for nine years and nine months, and had been looking forward to retirement in their 10th year, to suddenly find out they have to wait another 10 years, ”said Goldsmith.
National’s David Carter questioned the “social justice and fairness” of an overnight change for immigrants already in New Zealand.
Bayley said details would have to be discussed in a select committee later this year, but said public polls showed popular support for a longer qualification period for NZ Super.
Priyanca Radhakrishnan, Minister for Diversity, Inclusion and Ethnic Communities, said: “This bill will disproportionately affect some people, and that is because immigrants from certain countries with which we have social security agreements do not They will be affected by this, but immigrants from countries like China and India will. “
Braden Fastier / Stuff
Priyanca Radhakrishnan of Labor says the proposed law would have a disproportionate impact on Chinese and Indian families.
Australia and the UK are among the small handful of countries with which New Zealand has social security agreements.
Chinese associations across Auckland sent appeals to MPs calling the proposal “inhumane” and calling for an exemption for migrants already in New Zealand, calling for the increase from 10 to 20 years to be staggered over a period of 10 years for new migrants.
Aucklander Gloria Gao said her parents, who came to live in New Zealand in 2012, were very concerned about the proposed law.
They were in their 60s and a short distance from qualifying for NZ Super. Both received small Chinese state pensions, but were not enough to live on.
“It is not fair to them. By the time they turn 10 they will be quite old, ”Gao said.
“If he goes ahead, they would feel pretty desperate. It lacks social justice, ”he said.
She and her husband Alan Yu worked full time, she as a social worker and he in sales, and they were able to work their long hours thanks to their parents providing childcare.
Both had studied in New Zealand and had transitioned to become residents, with the support of their parents, who had sold their home in China to come to New Zealand and, like the Wentzels, had helped the couple put together the deposit. for a house.
“They contribute a lot. I want to thank you for the contribution you have made. They treat New Zealand as a second homeland. We should take care of them, ”Gao said.
She said that both were also only children as a result of China’s one-family, one-child policy, and that in the Chinese community there was an obligation for children to care for their parents in old age.
Hendrik Wentzel said that the African way was also for children to support parents, just as parents supported their children.
“In Africa we have a tremendous sense of caring for our parents and taking them and their well-being into account in our daily lives,” he said.
