Locked-out New Zealanders outraged as visa scheme for rich foreigners resumes
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
> With their visas in hand, investors may apply to compete for spots in New Zealand’s congested MIQ system. A stay in MIQ is a prerequisite for entry to the country, which has been largely closed to non-quarantined international travel since March 2020 to protect against Covid-19.
So… these people have pledged to invest huge sums of money into NZ and the end result is that they have to apply for the same MIQ spots as everyone else?
Seems the outrage should be directed at this MIQ system. The visa scheme seems to be an enormous benefit to NZ.
The rule of law is the key innovation that allowed the industrial revolution to take place bringing the West to its present rich and free lifestyle.
Adherence to the rule of law is a major reason why NZ is regularly in the top 5 countries globally for lack of corruption, transparency, and ease of doing business.
Abandoning the rule of law leads eventually to autocracy. From this distance the US appears to be well down that road.
If you’re talking about the visa itself, these rich folks are getting approved through an immigration pathway approved by parliament. Nobody is taking any shortcuts here.
[1] https://senatestockwatcher.com/
(edit: the parent comment was asking about violations of rule of law "over here" referring to the US being down that road in its parent comment)
If the MIQ program is similar to some citizenship programs where you get points for things and this is giving them as many or more points than just having citizenship does, I would agree it's unfair.
What you are describing, in any event, is more about Equal Treatment Under the Law, in a moral sense (avoiding any excuse that could read like “anyone can invest $10 million so it’s technically open to everyone”).
But as others here say, the visa holders get in line for limited quarantine facilities like anyone else. It seems like the outrage is about these brand-new residents getting equal treatment with current residents, instead of the current residents getting priority. There is a reasonable case you should prioritize existing citizens over new residents, as they likely have greater reliance interests on their legal residence, but it’s not any rule-of-law or equal-treatment claim.
This seems flawed to me. Do poor people get to queue up for MIQ? No, because they can’t qualify for the visa scheme because they aren’t rich enough. So it’s not really equal treatment for these new residents because they are already given an advantage because of their money. They qualify simply because they are rich.
Equal treatment would be letting all foreigners apply for the same visa scheme based on non-monetary merits such as occupation.
And okay, that's a reasonable point to make — in isolation. But in context, do you honestly suggest that the New Zealand outrage described here would be remedied by opening more visas to more people, and getting them into the quarantine?
When you say it like that, creating a contrast between "east and west" and dishonest/criminal behaviour, it sounds a bit racist. Perhaps you'd like to expand on that point?
I also like to point out, I don't think the West is any better either. As for Russia, I don't know enough to judge them. That, I apologize.
> Aren’t most rich residents in NZ from the UK and US
I also want to clarify this point. NZ is not usually on the list for rich Chinese people. They go to Singapore. But it is for rich Americans like Larry Page, Peter Thiel, and a few Silicon Valley execs.
Your point about playing fair seems a bit specific. Do you think american and european startups play fair? So in that case american and european tech-millionaires should be allowed to invest in NZ and get a visa?
>> As for Russia, I don't know enough to judge them. That, I apologize.
> Do you think american and european startups play fair?
>> I also like to point out, I don't think the West is any better either.
> So in that case american and european tech-millionaires should be allowed to invest in NZ and get a visa?
>> I also want to clarify this point. NZ is not usually on the list for rich Chinese people. They go to Singapore. But it is for rich Americans like Larry Page, Peter Thiel, and a few Silicon Valley execs.
You clearly seemed triggered and have a bone to pick as you didn't read the entirety of my previous comment. It seems like you want to steer this thread into an argument between the East and West, which wasn't the point of my original argument and I have clarified that already. You might want to see a psychiatrist because there is definitely something more going on with you trying to project onto me. Today is Christmas, I wish you a Merry Xmas.
I do think your original and follow-up comments were just outright racist, though, which's a shame. Perhaps you could take a look at that perception you have, that "russian and chinese don't play fair", and justifying it with "they work too much" and "bullying tactics".
The wrapping of this last comment of yours is quite strange. Telling me to see a psychiatrist and then wishing me merry christmas haha I prefer direct rudeness and name-calling instead of whatever that is. Perhaps you could also take a look at that kind of behaviour and reconsider.
I simply pointed out that the system was unfair to regular Chinese people. Something that almost all of my Chinese friends also agree in the tech industry. Since you seem to know quite a lot about the system in China, how many years of experience do you have working in China? Clearly, you must know a lot more than me judging by your comment and brushing off 996 as simply "working too much".
If I had to guess, I think you are a New Zealander that has never worked a day in China before. You defend China maybe because your parents are from there, but you have no idea what it is actually like to work there as a regular citizen. You call anyone that talks badly about China's system as racist.
If you truly think I am racist, then I feel sorry for your delusion. I urge you to move back and work there for at least 5 years. Perhaps then, you will see how the rich take advantage of those below and you wouldn't brush off 996 as simply "working too much" and "bullying tactics" as nothing when your wage depends on it.
In fact, I have yet to meet one regular Chinese person that defends the rich like you do. Most of them are hated in China for creating a highly unfair society. Those that do are usually people like you: full of vigor, nationalistic pride, and 0 life experience. The irony for you is that even CCP agrees with me regarding the rich.
It's a shame to meet people like you online really. To outright call people you don't agree with as racist.. no manners whatsoever.
> Telling me to see a psychiatrist and then wishing me merry christmas haha I prefer direct rudeness and name-calling instead of whatever that is.
I think that just points to our upbringing right? Direct rudeness was never acceptable where I grew up. But I am certain being rude to people is nothing more than having breakfast for you. And to be proud of it...smh. For your own sake, you might want to learn some manners sooner rather than later. People won't take it kindly to being called racist in the real world.
One last note, I was being serious about seeing a psychiatrist. It was meant for your own good. Your comments show serious signs of projection and self righteousness.
I am more familiar with how these schemes work in the US, Canada and UK. At least in the US the scheme is particularly egregious since investing in real estate counts. https://www.mgac.com/blog/eb-5-real-estate-financing-trends-...
BTW, I know Honduras has an investor visa, too.
This will probably happen, maybe in our lifetimes but it’ll be at the expense of the nation state and blocs like the EU. Probably a good thing such that people can choose where they want to live but it’ll eventually revert back to borders again very quickly as the wealthy shore up resources in the best places and then leave everyone else to fend for themselves. We already saw this “wealth flight” during the pandemic when remote tech workers and executives fled cities and high taxes to create their own little versions of Galt’s Gulch all over the mountain west and no income tax states. When we get to open border policies under the auspices of fueling economic growth you’ll see this occur again. And when this occurs the shells of former nation states will no longer provide services like healthcare because there won’t be anybody to pay for it. The wealthy certainly won’t.
NZers should expect to be on the hook for at least a few class action lawsuits for damages. For example people who have watched loved ones die on a video call because they haven't been rightfully allowed back into their country.
It's going to cost in the long run but the dust hasn't settled yet. I'll be joining up for damages and a few months extra living costs placed on me before I could get a MIQ spot.
> Section 4 specifically denies the Act any supremacy over other legislation. The section states that Courts looking at cases under the Act cannot implicitly repeal or revoke, or make invalid or ineffective, or decline to apply any provision of any statute made by parliament, whether before or after the Act was passed because it is inconsistent with any provision of this Bill of Rights.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Bill_of_Rights_Act...
whats the point of such bill of rights, if it has no supremacy?
[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty
The most important part of stromtium_90's reply is the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty, the idea that no legislature can do something that a future legislature cannot undo. Every legislature, including the US Congress, follows this principle ... with the exception of the constitution/founding treaty/etc., which is the only thing that is superior to that legislature's power. New Zealand does not have such a document. Neither does the UK. So, theoretically, both countries' parliaments can do anything as long as the action complies with any treaties signed with other nations ... and, of course, the parliaments can always use whatever exit option the treaties provide, if necessary.
So given that it hasn't worked out as planned and they have directly violated freedom of movement etc, they have some pretty major issues.
This was how it was orignally written. I think they've tried to change it to install a CEO of MIQ which is the fall guy and absolves the govt now.
However, this will all be sorted out when the lawsuit goes ahead next year from the Grounded Kiwis (mentioned in the article) and hopefully a win for justice here. Given every legal challenge so far has been lost by the govt or backed out of at the last minute, there's a fairly good chance if someone or a group persues it to the final ruling, there will be a case set for a class action follow up.
Their early lockdowns were unlawful, but they fixed that in a few days with new legislation. A court actually ruled they were initially unlawful, but said that was OK because the government had good intentions.
But, but the Cato Institute says it's the freest country in the world. And the Heritage foundation places it in the list of the most economically free. No way those ratings are bollocks.
P.S.: Interestingly, the latter puts Kazakhstan (where the president and his people shamelessly extort 40-60% share of every major business and enterprise) in the "mostly free" section. Makes one wonder about how those ratings are composed.
And the description of Kyrgyzstan shows its authors don't understand what they are writing at all:
> Former Prime Minister and ruling Social-Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan member Sooronbai Jeenbekov defeated former President Almazbek Atambayev in 2017 elections that were the most competitive in the country’s history.
It's equivalent to:
> Former Vice President and ruling US Democratic Party member Joe Biden defeated former President Barack Obama in 2020 elections that were the most competitive in the country’s history.
Are you supporting mob rule? If so, you might wish to move to another country where "outrage" can lead to people getting killed right on the street in front of you.
Seriously, if you see "outraged" in a headline, be careful.
Let's say a time comes when every NZ'er who wants to get back to the country can do so immediately. Do you think it would be wrong for NZ to prioritize immigrants who can bring material wealth to the economy in general (not to politicians specifically)?
It's the monetary equivalent of importing intelligent students to top-tier graduate programs.
Btw, NZ can afford to maintain a top spot on all these lists because it is a gated country with population less than that of NYC.
NZ's borders have always been closed for the world's poor. Now it is closed for non-elites and the just plain rich are revolting against it.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/22/on-the-edge-ar...
> Critics say failing to allow family members to join skilled workers will undermine post-pandemic recovery
If the US did a fraction of that for H1B workers, there would have been virtue signaling speeches in the UN.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/tough-rules-see-migrants-give-...
Be a bit more generous like the US for immigration, and then we will see how the US and NZ fare.
This corruptions indices are pretty much always “corruption perception” indices, as in, New Zealanders consider their country to be less corrupt than other countries, not that it actually is less corrupt than other countries.
Rule of law doesn't mean the law can't make a difference between the rich and the poor, in fact, it is very common in tax law (the rich pay more taxes), but not only.
Rule of law just means "no corruption", essentially. That the laws are the only criteria for judging people, it is not a discussion about the fairness of the law itself. It there is a "no parking" sign, then under the rule of law, no one will be allowed to park, including Bob, who will be fined/towed like everyone else. But if the sign says "no parking, except for Bob", then Bob will be allowed to park even if people find it unfair.
Usually, high rule of law countries are also democracies, so laws are made by elected officials, or even directly by people, and fairness is an important part of the lawmaking process. Indeed, people are usually reticent to apply laws they feel unfair, but technically, rule of law can apply even in the most unfair, despotic systems.
> From this distance the US appears to be well down that road.
And yet you're the ones who are locked.
The industrialisation of Tsarist Russia kind of disproves that.
> Abandoning the rule of law leads eventually to autocracy. From this distance the US appears to be well down that road.
I agree with that.
Not sure why you’re talking about the idea rule of law like it’s something New Zealand invented or is somehow novel or unique?
This scheme was once touted as a way to jump start the NZ tech sector but it doesn't appear to be having any impact. Those getting the visa might only be in the country a few weeks in a year and their investments are going into companies which haven't done anything innovative in decades. The most scathing part of all is that New Zealand's still a terrible place to build a startup.
Not all investment sparks innovation - and innovation takes years. I would not expect people investing their life savings to get into NZ to invest in high-risk tech startups, but the investments they make will help the NZ economy all the same.
Investment flow where risk-adjusted returns are highest - that's the nice thing about free markets - you don't have to plan where to put the money - it'll go where it's most demanded.
This is how the free market works, in general. When prices go up, it incentivizes asset creators create more. This is one of the down-sides of zoning limitations - they do not let the market provide more for the additional demand.
...and a simple Google search confirms that NZ has been experiencing a construction boom.
The kind of houses which locals are priced out of due to low wage economy. Certainly good for wealthy immigrants and cashed up Kiwis returning from overseas though.
To those outside NZ: owning shares in non-NZ companies typically means a 5% yearly wealth tax if the shares don’t pay dividends (Ie most tech companies that are share price growth driven).
See https://www.ird.govt.nz/income-tax/income-tax-for-businesses...
Fair Dividend Rate isn't a wealth tax. It's a frankly bullshit option rich people can use when their investments do really well to cap the tax owed to 5% of the starting market value.
Hatch explain it a bit here: https://www.hatchinvest.nz/learn-articles/tax-50000-fif
There is a market to offering rich people passports. New Zealand is just Vanuatu but with extra-steps.
Who needs that when you can sell passports/real estate/ocean views for lots of money and little work involved.
You are absolutely correct on both counts. If we didn’t have MIQ, this would be a non-issue to most kiwis.
The root of it is MIQ has prevented kiwis from traveling to/from NZ for the last 2 years. This has created massive strain on separated families and extended families. It has created stress on those in NZ who cannot leave because the govt won’t let them return without a MIQ slot.
Globally, the pandemic has moved on from elimination to coexistence. Vaccines, good hygiene, being sensible.
NZ’s continued use of MIQ/draconian restrictions on freedom of movement is counter to what needs to happen (return to business as usual).
At this current point in time, with over 90% of eligible people vaccinated, the trade off between lives saved by MIQ vs returning to normality does not, IMO and a lot of other kiwis, justify the continuation of MIQ.
The picture should be clearer now? The business of NZ is selling to foreign investors. They are closing to contain the coronavirus because what matters are these foreign $$.
As it happens less than 50 have died, each one a tragedy, while I’ve just had a lovely Christmas with 3 generations, as many others are around the motu. Sure we had to video call relatives in other countries, but their lockdown conditions today were far far worse than what we have here.
Our society has decided that nobody should die from COVID. That’s still the right answer.
There were free MIQ slots 2 weeks ago.
FDA authorized covid pill two days ago:
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavi...
why do things have to be never/forever? Why can't people think in terms of better/worse/later?
> The MIQ system should be abolished
That’s not sensational though so it’s not reported on.
Also COVID case numbers have exploded since then so I can kind of understand NZ being hesitant to do the same.
Not allowing your own citizen to return home is something that should be unthinkable really.
This sentiment should terrify you. COVID is serious, but my god, there are so much more dangerous and lethal things out there. You’ve basically just given your government a virtual blank check to do as it pleases so long as the threat is sufficiently scary.
>”many many more living with chronic conditions and the economy and society crippled.”
You’re saying this would happen with widespread Covid, but this same outcome can happen with excessive containment. So many mom and pop small business have closed in my town since the pandemic began. And I live in America, where we aren’t nearly as restrictive.
This is not even slightly true, if you were familiar with the local legislation and political climate you would know that; but you're not.
Preventing new variants? Sure at the surface that might hold some credence, but that implies future responses will be to lock down again and impose massive economic costs and second/third order negative externalities on the population again... There will be more variants gauranteed, so what is being gauranteed here is perpetual restrictions, fragility and life in a hermit kingdom.
On your point around Xmas with three generations, congratulations, but without rapid lateral flow at home testing (which is still unavailable in New Zealand - wowee!), you might have unknowingly just had a super spreading event. The slowness of NZ policy to adapt to technological innovations is a real blight.
By the way New Zealands society decided no such thing; intellectual honesty goes a long way when presenting an arguement. Did we have a referendum to determine no one should die from covid? Its quite a perposterous thing to say.
Reality is MIQ was a knee jerk reaction by the MoH in March '20, faced with the stark realisation healthcare and its supporting beuracratic system was not up for the job. It still isnt and has no path to getting there. That is the real tragedy.
Big thinking and strategy is sorely needed in New Zealand. It's a shame all we get is confusion and people like yourself who think they know something trying to lead the narrative.
I was once a proud Kiwi, now I look on from afar and am saddened at the squandered potential of the place, underacheivment and lack of awareness are rife.
This is hilarious. Why hasn’t your society decided that nobody should die from obesity? Obesity kills far more people every year than COVID ever will, and would be a far easier problem to solve through legislation.
Why does NZ grant visas to obese people? Why are obese people allowed to go to restaurants or work? If the government made it difficult to be fat, far less people would die.
They don’t. You go thru serious health check when getting work visa and then another check when applying for residency. If you are fat with serious health issues you won’t pass.
Obese doesn't mean morbidly obese. The former can get a work visa (very common actually) when the latter might not.
Same with a friend who had some lung abnormalities since birth - very stringent checks.
Incredible seeing democracies like Australia and NZ tell their own citizens “no, you cant come home”.
To be fair, it's not their first dance with authoritarian measures. Both countries also employ widespread censorship for movies and video games among other things. Perhaps it shouldn't be that unexpected that they would cross the line on this too.
The only notable "movie" that I'm aware of being censored in NZ was the live stream of the Christchurch mosque shooting that killed 51 people.
One example of a relatively recent ban of something popular is the anime High School DxD. Ikki Tousen was also banned. They seem to ban a lot of Japanese made stuff.
Postal 2 is a game that was explicitly refused classification. This doesn't just mean that selling the game is illegal - afaik possessing the game is also illegal.
But ultimately what's banned isn't as important, because they're operating with a whitelist. Everything's banned by default until they get classified. If every country operated a system like that then it's likely most games and movies either wouldn't get published in NZ or would be published on a delay.
https://www.classificationoffice.govt.nz/industry/exemptions...
Most things are exempt.
Nevertheless, the classifications should be voluntary and not legally binding IMO. They're absurdly capricious and incoherent as is, and stifling to free expression and the economy.
e.g. illegal to give 1998's Shogun Total War strategy game to a 17 year old but can give Battlefield Bad Company to a five year old.
It’s interesting, NZ is a very egalitarian society and it has been one of the strengths through the pandemic to date. People were/are willing to adhere to strict lockdowns (proper ones) or quarantine at the border because it was for the greater good of the entire society rather than ‘what was best’ for a handful of individuals.
The difference was, was that they didn’t fuck over their citizens when they tried to return - they did their best to accommodate them.
But amazingly NZers are willing to give the government a pass on not altruism, but incompetence and violation of a right even Singaporeans enjoy.
Some people have empathy for others and aren't purely selfish
This one always get a chuckle out of me. Australia is the most facist Western power. It barely has a free media because some rich dude bought it all. They wanted an egregious law forcibly drafting their citizens into being spies if they worked for tech companies. They extensively spy on the internet. They censor video games. The list goes on and on.
Without MIQ we couldn't have executed our elimination strategy. Probably thousands of people would have died of COVID, or we would have had stronger and longer lockdowns --- probably both --- all highly detrimental to the well-being of people living in NZ.
So why should the right of return take priority over all that?
There is quite literally nothing to suggest that having a higher intake would have created a single additional death or resulted in stronger or longer lockdowns.
New Zealand's own incompetence in not being able to come up with purpose-built facilities to handle overseas arrivals can't be written off with hypotheticals. It has been two years, no more excuses.
NZ has had more than enough time to prepare for COVID in a post elimination world. Why does MIQ still exist?
Why did NZ provide MIQ slots for non essential sports journeys like the Olympics and All Blacks tours. Do you think any Olympian or All Black could look the son or daughter of a dead parent in the eye and say that it was right for their space in MIQ to take precedence over the chance for a loved one to say goodbye for one last time?
> How many nurses and doctors have we recruited overseas?
I don't have the exact numbers, but many hundreds at least.
> Why does MIQ still exist?
Right now it exists to keep Omicron out while we get through Christmas, see how well we can cope with Delta using the traffic light system, get boosters into the arms of people who were vaccinated more than 4 months ago, and learn how bad Omicron is.
If the news about Omicron stays good and there are no other surprises I don't expect MIQ for NZers to exist past the end of Feb, or at all past the end of April.
> Do you think any Olympian or All Black could look the son or daughter of a dead parent in the eye and say that it was right for their space in MIQ to take precedence over the chance for a loved one to say goodbye for one last time?
There is an exemption system that gives priority for such emergency cases so it's not obvious to me how many such injudicious situations have occurred. When they have occurred, I'm more bothered by the MIQ-users who were just entering NZ for a nice holiday, or returning from a holiday. I consider it a major defect of our MIQ system that we never tried to block those low-priority users ... but I understand it would have been hard, since a lot of people have been claiming such trips are essential for their mental health.
Also I have a lack of empathy for people rushing back to NZ for forseeable end-of-life visits. In my view, if you care about your parents a lot, you live where they are so you can be with them for more than just the last minute.
Ok I can’t take you seriously anymore. You are saying no one should ever move more than a short drive away, ever. Yeah right.
Furthermore, my anecdotal observation is that articles in The Guardian about New Zealand reflect not reality, but rather the talking points of a very small subset of the hard Left of our political class. I know that this is The Guardian’s line in general, but it somehow feels more egregious when applied to a situation I’m more personally familiar with.
their UK coverage is similar also
they were previously reputable (if slightly biased), but post 2016 reputability seemed to cease to be a priority
Do you support denying re-entry to people who are already citizens as a means of doing that?
I don't know how you can say that. It's the inevitable result of a system with finite capacity (once capacity is reached).
> Do you support denying re-entry to people who are already citizens as a means of doing that?
Which implies the people entering on these visas are taking places away from someone else but they’re not, they’re entering the same lottery system as everyone else. Unless you’re suggesting that only citizens should be allowed to enter the country?
You could make an argument the work here/look see initiative that imported skilled labor was somehow a counter indication of a plutocracy but I think its largely just salt in the wound for the average NZ resident as it ran defense for anyone who pointed a finger at silicon valley for buying their island oasis. They could have spent that money on stem education locally but outright chose not to.
>NZ charter 4200 kilometer medevac flight while country is on total lock down, and the emergency is so urgent whole thing takes >24 hours before the flight even takes off.
“The day after the application was received, a New Zealand air ambulance staffed by a New Zealand ICU nurse-escort medevaced the child and an adult family member from Fiji to New Zealand,”
https://apnews.com/article/technology-lifestyle-travel-new-z...
Reminder, Sydney is merely 1 hour extra flight time away and borders were wide open in January.
The small number of people being granted these residency visas won't get priority in MIQ they'll have to queue with everyone else. What we are seeing here is a small resumption of our normal immigration regime, we're also resuming taking in refugees
This isn't about simply "buying citizenship".
It's about literally bouncing people who are already citizens out (for the duration of the pandemic).
> Otherwise what's the reason for a rich one to invest into country at all?
These new visa holders just make it a little bit harder for citizens and residents to enter the country, that's all. Over 200,000 people have gone through MIQ during the pandemic --- that's a lot for a population of 5M. People who wanted to come back since the start of the pandemic have been able to come back.
I don't think you can buy citizenship in most Central/Western European countries. You may be able to buy residence status but not citizenship.
I’ve checked 2 (UK and Switzerland) and both offer some form of Investor visa, so it’s really no different to the New Zealand situation (other than general restrictions on entering the country).
Or yano, deportation / imprisonment...
There's not many good solutions in this case and it is very difficult to match a reservation spot with an airline ticket out.
isn't this what you'd want? deported back to your country? It's not like you could be denied entry at the airport, and deported back to the foreign country...
lol
Then as other commenters have mentioned, it's going to have some long lasting consequences.
It will make a lot of the countries in the world require you to get a visa before entering (or even transiting), as in apply for a visa, spend 3-4 months dealing with embassies and spending a decent amount of money while you explain what happened and potentially be denied anyway.
I.e. you'll know what it's like not to have been born in a first world country.
Luckily Taiwan border opened up at the last minute and we were able to travel there instead.
Basically the whole quarantine and MIQ is a massive cluster fuck mess. And you can’t even call anyone. You can only contact them via email.
[1] https://www.miq.govt.nz/being-in-managed-isolation/charges-f...
[2] https://www.miq.govt.nz/about/media-centre/common-topics-for...
[3] https://www.miq.govt.nz/being-in-managed-isolation/isolation...
How long should MIQ exist for?
Who should be responsible for paying MIQ dues?
I disagree that the traveler should be responsible anymore due to the high vaccination levels. The NZ govt, if it wishes to continue denying kiwis freedom of movement to return home to NZ (or travel to other countries they are citizens of) should shoulder the burden. Or a tax on the eligible-but-unvaccinated… after all, the traveler is having to quarantine to “protect” others, not themselves.
Ending MIQ is inevitable but it's a one-way decision. Once the virus takes hold there's no going back, even if you take quarantine and isolation to China levels. Nobody likes a lockdown. My opinion is that the right time is when the globally dominant variant is a fast-spreading one with a proven hospitalisation rate post-wave that is lower than what NZ could cope with, given the vaccination rate. Omicron could be a candidate but its wave is still spreading, so it's too early to tell.
As for MIQ dues, the government and therefore the people bear its cost. NZ$13 million isn't a trivial sum, but it isn't huge either, so while any scheme to reduce the burden would be welcome, a plan with a huge potential cost such as ending MIQ is a bit too much risk, especially with Omicron data coming soon on the horizon.
- we had to enter the MIQ lottery five times before ‘winning’ a spot. The lottery system is the same used by some shoe drops and ticket reservations, and there is no weighting given to citizens that have enrolled in previous lotteries.
- when you make it through the lottery and select a date, it has to match the date you arrive in NZ exactly. If flights only go to NZ on certain dates, and those dates are all taken, then you’re out of luck. Many people make it through the lottery only to find that there are no dates left that work.
- you are not told what MIQ hotel room or city you will be in until you arrive in NZ. At that point you may be flown across the country (adding and extra 5+ hours to the end of an international trip), and placed in who-knows-what hotel. You are charged a set fee for the hotel.
- at every stage of your stay at MIQ, the people running the show have the ability to prolong your stay if they believe there is any COVID risk. The morning we were packing our bags to leave, the hotel called to say we needed to stay in our room while they waited on an urgent COVID test for a suspected positive case. Had the result actually been positive, most of the hotel (everyone from our flight) would have needed to stay additional days.
- ‘famous’ people go through MIQ too. We met someone on the flight that plays the lead role in a popular TV series. Like everyone else, they were flown across the country and placed in a hotel room.
- the hotel food is usually not great. We were fortunate enough to be in an Uber Eats delivery area, so we ordered out a few times.
In regards to the linked article: the real problem, at least to me, is that New Zealand citizens with an urgent need to come home (visa, sick relative, funeral, etc) are not always able to do so.
MIQ is an interesting experience, and at least at the start of COVID it made it possible for NZ preserve a pre-pandemic way of life. Now that we’re years into COVID and vaccines are readily available, it’s extremely frustrating for New Zealanders with family or loved ones overseas. Public opinion is steadily shifting towards ‘open up the country’, and the government has announced some tentative dates for doing this (although they were recently shifted back due to omicron).
As someone who was in a Covid-free region of Australia all throughout the pandemic, I’ve seen first-hand what happens when borders are reopened. Local businesses are far less harmed from closed borders than they are from people avoiding clustering in indoor areas — either out of an abundance of caution for their health, or to avoid becoming a “close contact” of a Covid-19 case and then being forced into quarantine. Once borders reopen, associated mask mandates give everyone needless anxiety, while the hospital system beginning to buckle becomes a constant source of fear.
Closed borders allowed Australia and New Zealand to perform better economically than more permissive countries, and allowed their residents to live life like it was still 2019.
Permissive countries like America merely pretended to allow life to go on like it was 2019, while their conservative media exported tone deaf rationalizations for permissiveness to AU & NZ residents who were on average far better off than they were. The American media’s attempts at guilting antipodeans for closing themselves off to the world were laughed off as completely bizarre — most people were all too happy to allow the rest of the world to think they were doing it tough living their happy, blissful, Covid-free lives behind impenetrable borders.
AU & NZ would probably have at least another year of normal life left to live if their governments had directed international arrivals to quarantine in dedicated facilities in remote locations rather than in retrofitted hotels smack dab in the center of major urban areas.
The UK was doing well throughout all of Summer and we've only now had a bit of an Omicron scare due to people not wanting to self isolate over Christmas.
Most people aren't that bothered about corona, they respond to legal threats and marketing.
It's 2021, are humans able to 'stay away from others' in spaces that are large and vast?
Use some common sense and figure it out, there should be no material impedements here.
Frankly, being allowed back in your country is probably along the lines of 'human right' and there probably is not any condition in which the government could not allow it.
There's plenty of ways to allow for isolation.
NZ Climate is actually temperate, they could even have individual military tents with cots and plastic outhouses, while not exactly luxury, it could accommodate almost anyone, and most people esp. those under 35 wouldn't have a problem.
They could even do a rapid build of low quality structures i.e. mini-huts, pre-fab style, put them in locations outside the city.
Though a bit authoritarian, even ankle bracelets could be used in some case maybe for home quarantine.
Commandeering motels and hotels and putting the Health Authorities right on premise.
In Taiwan, when you arrive they don't want you on the public transit so they rent you a car.
They arrive to your home 10 minutes after you do with masks and explain the deal. They check up on you every day sometimes in person, sometimes by phone.
I suggest that most people will 'get the idea' when a government rep. is directly communicating to them, checking up, answering questions, letting them know the 'real boundaries' aka 'you can't go out for coffee', 'you can't have your family over etc.'
There shouldn't be much of a wait for that kind of thing.
> They could even do a rapid build of low quality structures i.e. mini-huts, pre-fab style, put them in locations outside the city.
> Though a bit authoritarian, even ankle bracelets could be used in some case maybe for home quarantine.
Though this might be in theory better (after all being allowed in at all is better than be stranded outside), this seems far worse of a PR nightmare. The headlines and accompanying pictures would be atrocious.
(Snark, to be clear).
Or is it simply open money laundering for international criminals?
Standard meaning that if it made it into a licensed institution that also does KYC/AML then its good enough for us!
Basically the concept is that its up to the customer to get money magically graced and cleared by their host government, and if there is not currently a problem its not anyone’s problem.
Think about it: what is legal?
China says that people with their currency cant move more than an equivalent of $50k/year out. If someone only earns Yuan on mainland China but has enough liquid money elsewhere to invest in this program, is it your problem to care about China’s currency controls to suggest this money violated that?
Well the same standard applies even if you were imagining terrorist financing and cartels.
There is no adequate system to know or care.
The 90% can't live isolated forever because of the 0.2% who can't have vaccines for medical reasons. (The remainder is made up of those who've made anti-vaxx part of their identity).
Put that money and resources into protecting the vulnerable, not into isolating New Zealand and severely impacting the economy in a vain attempt to keep a virus, which will be with us together, out.
Human lives aren't infinitely valuable. As an example, there were 318 road deaths in New Zealand in 2020, which could all have been avoided by lowering the speed limit to 10kmh.
This isn't a solution that would ever be considered seriously, because it's evident that the financial and flow-on social harm caused by such a rule would greatly outweigh the current death toll.
It's becoming increasingly evident that 'protecting those who can't be vaccinated by stifling New Zealand in draconian restrictions' is the same.
The old "we all need to get vaccinated so that those who can't are protected by herd immunity" thing doesn't seem to apply here.
Example - https://www.health.govt.nz/news-media/media-releases/third-p...
Kids are back at schools and daycares with no air filtration mandates, no parent bubble separation, no parent vaccine segregation…
Ultimate metric for abolishing MIQ is ICU pressure. And that was about to happen anyway just few days away, until Omicron (rightfully so, although given slip up with delta I’d say close the border completely).
I wouldn't travel if vacation was the only reason. Especially if I were living in NZ which is one of the most beautiful places on earth IMO
It's also kinda unfair to expect people to have seen Omikron coming :) with the distance to Europe most people from here in NZ only visit family once a year and often go for months. Suddenly returning would have been difficult and costly.
I'm surprised the fairly left-wing current NZ government is prioritising investors like this though.
Perhaps, it's unfair that the government is obligating severe COVID restrictions on travel for citizens (and non-citizens, alike) in a country with 80+% vaccination rates for a disease that's essentially endemic at this point. NZ seems to be just pushing the problem down the line at this point. There will never be a time where they can just open without any cases so why are they still so incredibly restrictive?
FWIW: I am not a NZer, I don't plan to visit NZ any time soon, and I'll admit I'm relatively unversed on the political situation in NZ.
These regulations sound too restrictive but the attitude towards covid also seems kind of advanced of where we actually are, which is a disease that is mutating due to people traveling and artificial vaccine scarcity
;)
The people you hear whining are not the people leaving for medical reasons. It's almost a sport watching people on the news complain about their ruined vacations.
How is that not a vacation?
Visiting family abroad is usually done on vacation time at work but it's much more necessary.
When Omicron appeared and it hadn’t been detected within the community in NZ it was obvious the NZ government would make changes to delay its introduction by moving to tighten MIQ settings and delaying any removal of quarantine restrictions.
https://www.miq.govt.nz/about/news/miqs-12th-voucher-release...
I don't see how this is relevant.
Moving forward, citizens and migrant workers will still be forced to get in line behind wealthy investors.