Final results update for the 1999 general election
To read the full research paper download the PDF document.
Executive summary
With special votes counted:
-
A Labour/Alliance coalition holds 59 of the 120 Parliamentary seats, Labour with 49 seats and the Alliance with 10.
-
The Green Party gains 7 seats in the House at the expense of Labour (3), National (2), New Zealand First (1), and the Alliance (1).
-
The Labour Party retains the six Maori seats.
-
Voter participation was 83.1 percent of registered voters, excluding disallowed votes, which is slightly lower than recent elections.
Final results update for the 1999 New Zealand general election [PDF 372k]
|
Food safety
To read the full research paper download the PDF document.
Executive summary
-
Health risks that may be present in foods include micro-organisms, chemicals, and physical contaminants.
-
The majority of food produced in New Zealand is exported, providing half of export earnings. Assurance of food safety is therefore important not only for public health, but also for our reputation as a producer of safe foods.
-
The rates of foodborne illness have increased 36% from 1993 to 1999 in New Zealand. The most significant contributor to food poisoning in New Zealand is the micro-organism Campylobacter, and New Zealand has the highest rate of reported cases of campylobacteriosis in the developed world.
-
The New Zealand Total Diet Survey in 1997/98 found pesticide residues in 59% of samples. Levels were well below “acceptable daily intake” limits recommended by the World Health Organization.
-
As of 1 July 2000, foods derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) cannot be sold in New Zealand or Australia unless the GMO source has commenced or passed a formal approval process. At present labelling is only required for those GM foods which are not “substantially equivalent in any characteristic or property” (e.g. nutrition or potential allergens).
-
The principal health agencies in New Zealand dealing with food safety issues are the Ministry of Health (MOH) and designated officers with health providers and territorial local authorities for domestic and processed foods, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) for exported foods and primary production. Amalgamation under the MAF Food Assurance Authority was proposed under the Food Amendment Bill in 1998.
Food safety [PDF 606k]
|
|
Freshwater use in New Zealand
December 2011
Freshwater is essential to New Zealand’s social, cultural, and economic well-being. It is also a focal point for recreational activities such as swimming, boating and fishing. New Zealand has 425,000 kilometres of rivers and streams, almost 4,000 lakes that are larger than 1 hectare and about 200 aquifers. By international standards, freshwater in New Zealand is both clean and plentiful in supply. However, not all of this water is in the right place at the right time, with some areas experiencing a surplus or shortage of water at certain times of the year. In addition, with land-use practices becoming more intensive, particularly in the agricultural sector, there is greater demand for water now than ever before, and evidence is building that its quality is declining in many water bodies.
Demand and allocation
It is estimated that total water use in New Zealand currently equates to two to three times more water per capita than in most other OECD countries. This is due, in part, to hydro-electricity generation which accounts for 60 percent of New Zealand’s electricity requirements. Allocation of freshwater “takes” (the amount of water that is permitted to be used) is largely managed by regional councils through the issuing of resource consents under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). Demand for water is increasing, particularly in areas that are already short of water. Drier parts of the country have the highest demand. In addition, several eastern regions, including Canterbury and Otago, have surface water catchments that are highly allocated, so come under increased pressure during drier times of the year.
There are currently over 20,500 consented freshwater takes in New Zealand of which around 200 consents are for hydro generation. Most of the hydro generation takes are termed non-consumptive, because this water, after hydro-power generation, generally returns to rivers and downstream storage lakes and can be used again by other water users.
Freshwater allocation (excluding hydro) in 2010 Consented irrigated area by crop in 2010
Source: Update of Water Allocation Data and Estimate of Actual Water Use of Consented Takes 2009–10, Aqualink Research Ltd (2010).
Three water consent surveys (1999, 2006 and 2010) show that total volume of water allocated nationally has increased by a third over the last 11 years. However, if hydro generation is excluded the national allocation has nearly doubled. This was mainly due to an increase in the area of irrigated land, especially in Canterbury and Otago.
Consented irrigated area trends by region
Source: Update of Water Allocation Data and Estimate of Actual Water Use of Consented Takes 2009–10.
Present and future management
A National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management took effect on 1 July 2011. National Policy Statements (NPS) are planning documents under the RMA that give central government direction for making resource management decisions about nationally significant issues. Councils have to ensure that their policy statements and plans “give effect" to an NPS. The NPS for Freshwater Management requires councils to provide for improved freshwater management in their policies and plans. It includes direction in setting limits for water quality and improving and maximising the efficient allocation and use of water. Councils are required to implement the NPS for Freshwater Management by the end of 2014.
Environment Waikato, in accordance with the NPS for Freshwater Management, is proposing an addition in its regional plan. The council considers the current ‘first in, first served’ system used to grant water take consents is ineffective in prioritising water supply. Referred to as Variation 6 (to its regional plan), it proposes that the ‘first in, first served’ process is retained to a degree, but only after domestic and municipal supply requirements are met and there is enough water for other ‘in stream’ uses such as renewable electricity generation. In addition, water use consents in each catchment would expire at the same time rather than a whole range of times, as happens at present. Allocations would thereafter be made for 15 year periods and water take consents could be transferable to someone undertaking similar activities in the same area.
Water allocation will continue to be the focus of freshwater management in New Zealand. Balancing the competing needs of water users – recreational users, town water suppliers, hydro-electricity generators, tourist operators, and farmers – is likely to become increasingly important.
Charles Feltham, Research Services Analyst
Freshwater use in New Zealand [PDF 251k]
|
‘Gaps’ between ethnic groups: some key statistics
To read the full research paper download the full PDF document.
Executive summary
-
Relative to the European/Pākehā population, the Māori and Pacific Island population have lower incomes, higher rates of unemployment, poorer educational and health outcomes, a greater likelihood of living in rental accommodation, and proportionately more convictions for criminal offences.
-
The proportion of Māori, Pacific Island, and Asian people in the New Zealand population is increasing. These populations also have a younger age structure which has implications for age-related socio-economic indicators such as employment, income, home ownership, and crime.
-
Te Puni Kōkiri is coordinating the monitoring of socio-economic indicators to determine whether the gaps between Māori and non-Māori are closing, and will next report to the Government by the end of this fiscal year. Variable quality and ad-hoc reporting of the relevant statistics in the past has limited the ability of Te Puni Kōkiri to chart some of the trends accurately
'Gaps' between ethnic groups: some key statistics [PDF 637k]
|
|
GDP in OECD countries: New Zealand's relative position
GDP in OECD countries: New Zealand's relative position [PDF 320k]
|
|
Genetic modification
Genetic modifcation [PDF 368k]
|
|
Genetic modification - a resource document for New Zealand MPs
Genetic modifcation - a resource document for NZ MPs [PDF 3248k]
|
Green taxes: a brief overview
To read the full research paper download the full PDF document.
Executive summary
-
Green taxes are one of a variety of policy measures designed to control activities which affect the environment.
-
They consist of charges on pollution or on whatever causes the pollution, paid for by producers and/or consumers.
-
These charges act as an incentive on producers and consumers to reduce their dependence on the taxed item.
-
Other environmental policy measures include regulatory instruments, suasive instruments and economic instruments besides green taxes.
-
These policy measures can be evaluated in terms of their environmental effectiveness, economic efficiency, equity and acceptability.
-
Most economists believe that green taxes and other economic instruments generally achieve environmental objectives more cost-effectively than regulatory instruments.
-
However, exceptions exist, and detailed study is required to determine the optimal policy for any specific environmental problem.
-
Furthermore, empirical evidence is inconclusive. This is the result of limited data and the fact that most green taxes are secondary parts of wider regulatory structures and have charges set too low to have any marked effects on incentives.
-
Green taxes and other economic instruments have been the subject of considerable political and analytical interest over the last few years, and work is being produced which should be of more practical use to policy-makers.
Green taxes: a brief overview [PDF 375k]
|
|
Greenhouse effect and climate change
Greenhouse effect and climate change [PDF 338k]
|
|
Greenhouse effect and climate change: a resource document for New Zealand MPs
Greenhouse effect and climate change: a resource document for New Zealand MPs [PDF 4347k]
|
Health indicators
To read the full research paper download the PDF document.
Executive summary
-
This paper, the first in a series devoted to social indicators, presents a number of health indicators that report on health resources, health status, and non-medical determinants of health in New Zealand.
-
Good health – broadly defined to incorporate both mental and physical aspects – is a core component of social well-being and a determinant of people’s ability to participate in society. It is affected by a range of factors including the organisation and capacity of the health system, health policy and funding, genetic predisposition, lifestyle choices, environmental conditions, and socio-economic influences.
-
As a percentage of total government expenditure, Vote Health represented 12.6 percent in 1989/1990, 15.9 percent in 1994/1995, and 18.3 percent in 2000/2001.
-
In terms of per capita health expenditure, New Zealand ranked 20th in 2000 among OECD countries, spending 16 percent below the OECD average.
-
New Zealand spent 8.1 percent of GDP on total health expenditure in 1999, about the OECD average (8.3 percent).
-
Over two-thirds of health spending (69.1 percent) is for personal health expenditure (hospital spending, etc), followed by disability support services (24.5 percent), public health services (1.7 percent), independent service providers (0.5 percent), and Ministry of Health expenditure (0.9 percent).
-
In 1999, life expectancy for New Zealanders at birth was 75.7 years for males and 80.8 years for females – above the OECD average, but below the levels found in Japan, Australia, and Canada.
-
In 1999, three diseases were responsible for 81 percent of deaths due to disease (cancer 37 percent, ischaemic heart disease 31 percent, and cerebrovascular disease 13 percent).
-
Since 1960 the incidence of cancer in New Zealand has doubled – in 1998 it was 312 per 100,000 population.
-
The incidence of diabetes is 3.9 percent over the total population, but higher among Maori (8.9 percent), and among Pacific Islanders (7.5 percent).
-
The incidence of asthma is lowest in the King Country (5.5 percent) and highest in Clevedon (23 percent)
-
New Zealand has one of the highest rates of youth suicide among OECD countries, and the second highest rate among the 97 countries with suicide data reported by the World Health Organisation.
-
New Zealand and the United States have high proportions (about 90 percent) of their adult population who report their health to be “good” or better.
-
Total alcohol consumption in New Zealand has declined 25 percent from its peak in the early 1980s to 8.9 litres per capita in 2000, slightly below the OECD average.
-
The proportion of New Zealanders aged 15 and over who smoked tobacco declined from 28 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 – a lower proportion than most OECD countries.
Health indicators [PDF 630k]
|
Higher Education Funding – Overseas Models
To read the full research paper download the PDF document.
Executive Summary
- There are a diverse range of funding arrangements for higher education throughout the world. The arrangements generally reflect governments’ and societies’ objectives for higher education and are the means through which they attempt to achieve them. The resulting systems often represent a compromise between competing pressures.
- Many countries have moved away from direct control relationships with universities to those based on autonomy of institution, with funding tied to quality, efficiency, and often, incentives towards government priorities for development.
- Student choice is sometimes used as a measure of quality and funding is awarded accordingly, while in other countries funding is contingent on intrinsic quality measures such as the number of successful completions or the numbers of credits achieved.
- In large, federalised countries, funding is often provided by local, state and central governments and there may be a multiplicity of arrangements within the country.
Higher education funding: overseas models [PDF 245k]
|
|
Household Incomes, Inequality and Poverty
December 2011
Household Income
Median household income increased 47 percent in real terms from the low point in 1994 to 2010. The growth for Māori was 68 percent, and for Pacific people 77 percent. In 2010, just over two thirds of two-parent families were dual-earner families, up from a half during the early 1980s. This change and the increasing proportion of dual-earner couple-only households were the main factors increasing median household incomes more rapidly than the average wage for individuals. In 2010, half of older people (aged 66 years+) had less than $100 per week income from sources other than government transfers.
Income Inequality
Two ways of measuring income inequality are percentile ratios and the Gini coefficient. Percentile income ratios summarise the relative distance between two points in the income distribution. The ratio of the 80th percentile to the 20th percentile of the equivalised disposable household income distribution is used to measure inequality. The higher this ratio is, the greater the level of inequality.
Based on the 80:20 ratio inequality increased from 1986 to 2010. Inequality increased most rapidly from 1988 to 1992. There was a further net rise from 1994 to 2004. The ratio was 2.2 in 1986, 2.7 in 2001, 2.6 in 2007 and 2.4 in 2010. According to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), the decline from 2004 to 2007 was primarily because of the Working for Families (WFF) package, and the resulting growth in incomes for low to middle income households with children. The lower 2010 figures compared with 2007 reflected the decline in real incomes for the top two deciles, and a small real gain for lower deciles.
In 2010 the top 10 percent received a quarter, and the top 30 percent received slightly over a half, of the total population (equivalised) income. The distribution of household income in New Zealand was broadly similar to that in the United Kingdom and Australia.
The Gini coefficient takes into account the incomes of all individuals. In 2010 income inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient was lower than in 2001 (the lower the Gini score, the lower is inequality). Based on 2008-2009 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) figures for 34 countries, New Zealand’s inequality score of 33 was slightly above the OECD median (31). New Zealand was ranked 25th. New Zealand’s score in 2010 was 32, just above the OECD median. Inequality increased rapidly from 1988 to 1992, followed by an increase until around 2001 and then declined from 2001 to 2010.
Based on OECD data from 1985 and 2008, the Gini coefficient indicated that inequality increased in 17 of 22 countries. Inequality in New Zealand increased from 0.27 to 0.33 (see the graph below). The main factor increasing income gaps was greater wages and salary inequality. The rise in part-time and low-paid work extended the wage gap too.
Poverty
New Zealand does not have an official poverty measure. However, low-income thresholds or poverty lines can be used. The ‘fixed line’ measure anchors the poverty line in a reference year, then adjusts it each survey with the Consumer Price Index. The ‘moving line’ or ‘relative’ measure sets the poverty line as a proportion of the median income.
The fixed line measure (60 percent of median income) adjusted for housing costs indicated 15 percent of the total population lived in poverty in 2010, the same as in 2009. This ended a decline in poverty started in 1994. Child poverty rates were 22 percent from 2007 to 2010, following major falls from 2001. According to the MSD this was due to improving employment, income-related rents and WFF. Poverty rates for older New Zealanders (7 percent) were lower in 2010 than for any other age group (13 percent for 25 to 64 year olds and 22 percent for dependent children).
The poverty rate also remained unchanged on the moving line measure after adjusting for housing cost. The rate remained 18 percent from 2007 to 2010, as during the mid 1990s, but was double the 1984 rate. Based on OECD and European Union 2008-2009 figures, New Zealand’s population and child poverty rates were close to the overall medians.
According to the MSD, WFF had little impact on poverty rates for children in beneficiary families (around 70 percent in recent years), but halved child poverty rates for those in working families (8 percent in 2007 and close to the same since then). Poverty rates for Māori and Pacific children were higher than the rates for European/Pakeha children.
The Office of the Children’s Commissioner has found that children emphasised the impact of poverty on schooling, social inclusion and self-esteem. The experience of poverty was almost always negative, and could have psychological, physical, relational and practical effects.
Paul Bellamy, Research Services Analyst
Household Incomes, Inequality and Poverty [PDF 245k]
|
|
Housing issues
December 2011
Housing ownership and costs
Home ownership has fallen and the cost of housing has increased. The 2006 census indicated that 66.9 percent of all private dwellings were owned by their occupants. This was the third successive census in which rates of home ownership had fallen, the rate in 1991 having been 70.7 percent. Since the late 1980s, the proportion of households spending over 30 percent of their income on housing has increased significantly. High housing costs relative to household incomes are especially a concern for low-income households. Furthermore, households with housing costs over 30 percent of disposable income are more common when they include at least one non-European adult.
According to the Household Economic Survey for the year ended 30 June 2011, in the two years since 30 June 2009, housing costs increased while household income was relatively unchanged. Thus, the proportion of total household income that households spend on housing costs has increased. The proportion increased from 15.1 percent in 2008/09 to 16 percent in 2010/11. The proportion of households spending 30 percent or more of their income on housing costs increased from 19.5 percent in the year ended June 2009 to 21.8 percent in the year ended June 2011. Components of housing costs that increased between 2008/09 and 2010/11 were average weekly expenditure on rent and average weekly expenditure on property rates. Average expenditure on mortgages and loans was relatively unchanged over the two years.
There have been signs of a recovery in the housing market. The Treasury in October 2011 said the national market for new houses was showing signs of a recovery. The Quotable Value residential property index for October 2011 indicated that nationwide property values have gradually increased since the start of 2011. They were 1.2 percent above the same time last year, and 4.4 percent below the 2007 market peak. Based on the index, the initial upward movement in values was due to Auckland and post-quake Christchurch but now many other areas are also increasing. Real Estate Institute of New Zealand data on the housing market for November 2011 showed 6,008 unconditional sales for the month, an increase of 16.9 percent compared to November last year. The national median house price was $367,500, a new record.
Housing stock and crowding
The Registered Master Builders Federation has estimated that 20,000 to 25,000 new homes must be built annually to maintain housing stock and meet demand. However, in recent years less than 15,000 have been built yearly. In the September 2011 quarter residential building activity was at its lowest level in 18 years. This coincided with a near-record low earlier in 2011 for consents issued for new homes.
In 2006, 389,600 people (10 percent of the resident population), lived in households requiring one or more additional bedrooms to adequately accommodate household members. The level of crowding was similar to that in 2001, but had declined since 1986 when 392,700 people (13 percent) lived in crowded conditions. In 2006 living in a crowded household was more likely for the unemployed, younger people and Pacific peoples. Crowding was more likely for households in the bottom quartile of equivalised household income compared with those in the top income quartile.
State and social housing
As at 30 November 2011 there were 6,009 people on the waiting list for Housing New Zealand Corporation (HNZC) rental homes. Of these, 351 were Priority A, 2,358 Priority B, 1,656 Priority C and 1,644 were Priority D. Priority C and D were confirmed before 30 June 2011 as since 1 July 2011 only Priority A and B applicants have been eligible for a state house, and thus added to the waiting list. Priority A applicants are those whose housing need is assessed as being “at risk”, while the housing need of Priority B applicants has been assessed as “serious”. In 2010/11 Priority A applicants were housed on average in nine days.
HNZC forecasts a significant change in the distribution of demand for State housing. In numerous regions demand is expected to remain constant or even decrease. However, in many major urban areas a significant increase is expected. The composition of families requiring housing has also changed in recent years. The HNZC finds that many applicants now are single-parent families, families with four or five children, or single persons with high needs. In the past the usual family seeking housing would be a two-parent household with two or three children.
Social housing is the provision of assistance with housing to those who cannot otherwise meet their own housing needs. This assistance can either be ‘in kind’, or ‘in cash’. The Social Housing Unit at the Department of Building and Housing was established in July 2011. It aims to increase the supply of social and affordable housing.
The Christchurch earthquakes have impacted on the region’s State housing stock. HNZC houses approximately 18,000 people in 6,122 properties in Christchurch. Around three quarters of its houses were damaged by the earthquakes.
Weathertight homes financial assistance package
A PricewaterhouseCoopers report has identified about $11.3 billion of leaky home damage, but there are potentially more leaky homes. Under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Amendment Act 2011, qualifying home owners will receive a 25 percent contribution from the Government and may receive 25 percent from their local council. The contributions will be based on actual repair costs. As at 30 November 2011 the Department of Building and Housing had received 6,677 Weathertight Homes Resolution Service claims. These had been lodged for 9,262 properties.
Paul Bellamy, Research Services Analyst
Housing issues [PDF 194k]
|
|
Human Influenza A (H1N1) (Swine Flu)
19 June 2009
International Update – June 2009
Influenza A (H1N1) is a new influenza virus which has spread around the world through human to human transmission. On the 12 June 2009 the United Nations declared the spread of the influenza virus around the world had reached pandemic levels. The global pandemic alert level is now at its highest – phase six – an indication of its geographical spread, not its severity.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is the lead agency in the global response. As of 17.00 GMT, 15 June 2009, 76 countries have officially reported 35,928 cases of Influenza A (H1N1) infection and 163 deaths. Cases below are confirmed by WHO laboratory testing.
Countries reporting the largest number of cases and deaths (cumulative totals)
For a full list of confirmed cases and deaths by country please see the excel file included with the pdf. version of this research paper.
New Zealand timeline of human Influenza A (H1N1) case update status
Virus Update – June 2009
The Influenza A (H1N1) virus is spreading easily from person-to-person. While most cases seem to be mild, severe illness and death have been reported in a small proportion of cases. The Influenza A (H1N1) virus seems to be affecting young and previously healthy adults and adults with underlying medical conditions including chronic lung or cardiovascular disease, diabetes, immunodeficiencies and obesity.
WHO is recommending that drug makers speed up the production of an Influenza A (H1N1) vaccine. While the development of a vaccine against the virus has been underway since the virus was isolated it will not be available until September 2009
or later.
To date, most infections of new Influenza A (H1N1) have occurred in the northern hemisphere. However, there is concern that the spread of the virus to the southern hemisphere could have different and perhaps more severe effects. The current winter season gives the influenza viruses an opportunity to inter-mingle and possibly exchange genetic material in unpredictable ways
.
The Australian cases of Influenza A (H1N1) number 2118 with 1230 in the State of Victoria. On 17 June 2009 the Australian Government announced a new response phase to manage the outbreak. The new Phase of ‘protect’ will direct efforts to those most vulnerable to the virus. The policy of containment and quarantine of probable cases will be discontinued
.
International Pandemic: background
During March and early April 2009 Mexican public health authorities reported increased levels of respiratory disease, including reports of severe pneumonia cases and deaths. Testing of specimens identified the Influenza A (H1N1) strain. By the end of April the United States had 109 confirmed cases, including one death, while Mexico had 97 confirmed cases, including seven deaths, and nine other countries had reported low numbers of confirmed cases
.
On 25 April 2009 WHO announced Influenza A (H1N1) a public health emergency of international concern. On 29 April 2009 the United Nations influenza pandemic alert was raised to five on a six –level warning scale, signifying that the virus had caused sustained community level outbreaks in at least two countries in one WHO region and that a pandemic was considered imminent. On 9 May 2009 Australia confirmed its first case of Influenza A (H1N1) with a person returning from travel in the United States. On 18 May 2009 the Director-General of the World Health Organization convened a High-Level Consultation for all Member States at the start of the Sixty-second World Health Assembly to discuss the Influenza A (H1N1) pandemic risk
.
WHO is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. It is responsible for providing global pandemic leadership by working with Member States across a range of activities, including coordination under the International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005
, designation of global pandemic phases, pandemic vaccine production, coordination of a rapid containment operation, and providing early assessments of pandemic severity.
The WHO guidance document Pandemic influenza preparedness and response April 2009
should be used as a guide to inform and harmonise national and international preparedness and response before, during and after an influenza pandemic.
New Zealand Update – June 2009
The numbers of confirmed cases of the Influenza A (H1N1) virus in New Zealand continue to increase with the first community transmission recorded in Wellington on 14 June 2009. In response the Ministry of Health increased the pandemic status to Phase 6 - Scenario 6.2 Code Yellow/Red. On the 19 June, after further cases of community transmission, the Ministry of Health moved to a Manage It phase. Activities at the border would continue, but quarantine, the use of antiviral drugs, and individual (H1N1) testing would be reduced
. The next phase is Phase 6 – Scenario 6.3 – Code Red of the New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Action Plan.
While the symptoms of the illness are reasonably mild there will be disruptions to schools, businesses and health facilities. The southern hemisphere is also just entering its seasonal influenza season which will further compound disruptions and pressures on the health system
. Containment of the virus is still very important to avoid the simultaneous impact of the two influenza viruses.
Treatment of the epidemic influenza virus will happen at a family and community level. The Ministry of Health is advising households to stock up on essential goods and fever reducing medicines
. The majority of Influenza A (H1N1) cases will recover at home without the need for medical intervention. District Health Boards are the lead agency at a regional level and will consult with and coordinate primary and community health providers. DHBs will use Community Based Assessment Centres
(CBAC) to see and treat those with influenza symptoms separately from other health facilities.
The primary functions of the CBAC include:
-
providing clinical assessment, advice and referrals for those with influenza symptoms
-
enabling health professionals to specialise in influenza and infection control
-
providing a secure distribution centre for antivirals and antibiotics
-
support home-based self-care in association with telephone triage and advice.
Significant events in June
1 June 2009 – Ministry of Health sends out letter to all schools warning of possible school closures where cases of the Influenza A (H1N1) virus is found.
6 June 2009 – Ministry of Health starts public awareness campaign.
8 June 2009 – Regulations were promulgated adding Non Seasonal Influenza (swine flu) to the schedule of the Health (Infectious and Notifiable Diseases) Regulations
.
Background to New Zealand Influenza A (H1N1)
On 25 April 2009 the Auckland Regional Public Health Service (ARPHS) was notified after an influenza-like illness was detected in a group of Rangitoto College students and teachers returning from Mexico via Los Angeles on Flight NZ1. Specimens sent to the World Health Organization (WHO) laboratory in Melbourne tested positive for Influenza A (H1N1). As of 28 April 2009 New Zealand had three confirmed cases of Influenza A (H1N1) from the Rangitoto College party. On 29 April 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) became a notifiable disease in New Zealand by Order in Council. Passengers on all international flights arriving in New Zealand were provided with public health information and asked to fill in passenger locator forms so they could be more easily traced. Those showing signs of illness were quarantined and treated with antiviral drugs.
What is human influenza A (H1N1)?
H1N1 is a new strain of the influenza A virus that causes illness and death in people. This new virus is commonly referred to as swine flu because laboratory testing showed that many of the genes in the virus were similar to the strain of H1N1 influenza virus that normally occurs in pigs in North America. Further tests have shown that H1N1 also has significant differences; it has two genes from flu viruses that normally circulate in pigs in Europe and Asia, as well as avian and human influenza virus genes.
Like all influenza viruses the H1N1 virus can change constantly. When influenza viruses from different species infect pigs, the viruses can reassort (i.e. swap genes) and new viruses that are a mix of swine, human and/or avian influenza viruses can emerge. Probably the most well known outbreak of swine flu was among soldiers in Fort Dix, New Jersey, USA in 1976. The virus resulted in pneumonia in at least four soldiers and one death; all of these patients had previously been healthy. The virus is thought to have circulated for a month and disappeared. The source of the virus, the exact time of its introduction into Fort Dix, and factors limiting its spread and duration are unknown.
The symptoms of this new Influenza A (H1N1) virus in people are similar to those of other human seasonal influenza and include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue.
A significant number of people who have been infected have also reported diarrhoea and vomiting. At this stage it is understood that the H1N1 virus is passed from person to person in tiny droplets when an infected person coughs or sneezes in a similar way to the other human seasonal influenza. It is then inhaled into the nose or throat and attacks the cells of the host’s respiratory tract, causing inflammation. Symptoms usually appear one to four days after infection, and infected people can theoretically pass on the virus from one day before symptoms develop to seven days after symptoms develop.
The virus is transmitted more easily in crowded conditions and survives longer outside a host when conditions are cold and dry.
WHO has issued concern about southern hemisphere countries that are heading into winter and the influenza season.
Relatively minor epidemics of influenza typically occur in New Zealand during winter months, often affecting all age groups and causing many complications, including viral or bacterial pneumonia. There are approximately 100 deaths per year directly attributable to influenza. This does not include the many cases where influenza contributes to an elderly or chronically ill person’s death.
It is not known at this time how severe the H1N1 virus will be in the general population.
Different types of influenza are categorised as strain A, B, or C depending on microbiological characteristics of the virus. Influenza A is generally the cause of epidemics because it is highly genetically changeable, while Influenza B and C cause more limited outbreaks and milder disease.
Influenza pandemics
Pandemics are characterised by the global spread of a novel type of virus.
Three conditions must be present for a disease to cause a pandemic. These are
-
that a new virus subtype emerges to which the population has little or no immunity,
-
that the new virus can cause serious illness in humans, and
-
that it spreads efficiently between humans.
20th century Influenza pandemics
There were three pandemics caused by new influenza A virus subtypes which spread around the world within a year of being clinically recognised.
-
the 1918/19 ‘Spanish flu’ [A (H1N1)], which caused the highest number of known influenza deaths − many people died within the first few days after infection, and others died of secondary complications; nearly half of those who died were young, healthy adults
-
the 1957/58 ‘Asian flu’ [A (H2N2)]
-
the 1968/69 ‘Hong Kong flu’ [A (H3N2)].
Confirming cases of Influenza A (H1N1)
Because the symptoms are similar to other human influenza, laboratory testing is required to confirm a case of human Influenza A (H1N1). To diagnose H1N1 Influenza A infection, a respiratory specimen would generally need to be collected within the first four to five days of illness (the most infectious stage), however, some people, especially children, maybe contagious for seven days or longer. Identification as influenza A (H1N1) virus requires sending the specimen to a special laboratory for testing.
In New Zealand, specimens are tested at the New Zealand's National Influenza Centre (NIC). See the WHO list of Countries with PCR capacity in place to diagnose influenza A(H1N1) virus infection in humans
More information can be found in the WHO paper on swine Influenza A (H1N1) virus detection and confirmation guidance.
Influenza vaccine
The most effective way to prevent influenza is by vaccination.
Vaccination is also much cheaper than anti-viral treatment, and is particularly cost effective in high-risk groups.
Vaccines need to be customised to the specific strain of influenza that is circulating, so no vaccine can be manufactured until the responsible virus has been isolated.
Will there be a vaccine for H1N1?
Research is underway to develop a vaccine as soon as possible. However, wide scale production is still likely to take five-six months and limited production capacity means that some countries may miss out altogether.
A pandemic may arrive in a series of waves, so widespread vaccination may protect against subsequent waves. New Zealand has a contract with the Australian government's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories (CSL) to be supplied with a pandemic vaccine within 15 to 27 weeks after a pandemic is recognised by the WHO.
Tamiflu against Influenza A (H1N1)
Tamiflu (oseltamivir phosphate) and Relenza (zanamivir) are the two FDA-approved influenza antiviral drugs that are recommended by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention for use against the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus.
It is not a cure but has been shown to reduce the severity of symptoms, the chance of complications and the chance of transmission, particularly when treatment is started within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms.
It is recommended for treatment and prevention of adults and children over one year.
Possible side effects include nausea and vomiting, and the drug should be taken with caution when the patient is pregnant, breastfeeding or has kidney disease or fructose intolerance. The Ministry of Health advises a five day period for a treatment course of antiviral drugs. The person is not infectious after 72 hours of taking the drugs. A prophylactic course of antiviral drugs should last 10 days.
Type A influenza viruses have been known to mutate to develop resistance to Tamiflu.
Five cases of Tamiflu-resistant seasonal influenza have been diagnosed in New Zealand in the past nine months
with Tamiflu-resistant H1N1 flu strains becoming more prolific in Hong Kong and the US.
The New Zealand stockpile of Tamiflu is approx. 1.25 million courses. On 1 May 2009 the Ministry of Health ordered an extra 125, 000 courses of Relenza.
Tamiflu went on direct sale from pharmacies for people with genuine 'flu' symptoms on 1 May 2009. This was part of New Zealand's regular annual anti-flu plan, rather than a response to the concerns about the H1N1 strain. A course of Tamiflu costs $NZ 60 - 80 per person.
There were 8000 courses of Tamiflu available on pharmacy shelves.
New Zealand’s pandemic preparedness plan
The Ministry of Health takes the lead role in planning for a health related emergency. The Ministry has established an internal Pandemic Emergency Group to oversee and co-ordinate pandemic planning for the health sector. The Group reports to the National Health Emergency Plan (NHEP) steering group. The Pandemic Emergency Group and the NHEP steering group report to the Ministry of Health Executive Team and the Minister of Health.
District Health Boards (DHBs) are the lead agencies for planning and responding to a pandemic on a local and regional basis. DHBs follow major incident and emergency plans and regional incident co-ordination plans specifically for pandemics.
Intersectoral Pandemic Group
The whole of Government pandemic planning involves the Intersectoral Pandemic Group made up of 11 government agency work groups led by the MOH and co-ordinated by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC).
The Ministry of Health has produced the New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Action Plan in November 2006. The plan outlines national scenarios based on the WHO suggestions for phase subdivisions, and gives corresponding alert codes and strategies.
New Zealand is currently on the standby phase Code Yellow.
In summary the codes mean:
Code White is information/advisory only, used in the planning stages of pandemic preparedness and for notification to the health sector of areas of concern overseas.
Code Yellow is a standby phase, used to alert the health sector when there has been a significant development in the virus overseas, or single isolated cases in New Zealand.
Code Red is the response phase, used to alert the health sector that it should activate its response plans.
Code Green is to notify the health sector to standdown response and move into the recovery phase.
What are the risks to New Zealand if an influenza pandemic occurred?
A recent study estimating the impact of the next influenza pandemic on New Zealand
assumed between 15 percent and 35 percent of the population would be affected, indicated between 1,600 and 3,700 deaths, between 6,900 and 16,200 hospitalisations and between 325,000 and 759,000 medical consultations were likely in the event of a pandemic. Eighty three percent of the deaths would occur among high-risk individuals (e.g. people with diabetes) and 59% would be among people under 65 years of age. The study also indicated that in the peak week of the epidemic 42% of all public hospital beds would be required for influenza cases, and each GP would have 83 consultations for influenza. The health service utilisation rates would vary depending on other factors such as the average length of stay in hospital, the number of consultations by registered nurses and the number of GPs and nurses not working due to illness or caring for relatives. The demand for medical services would overwhelm hospital and primary care capacity, which is already a problem in some places during the usual seasonal influenza outbreaks, and there may be shortages of critical care beds and mechanical ventilators. This study was based on the illness and death rates experienced during the 1968 pandemic, which was a very mild event compared with some other pandemics. Even a relatively minor pandemic could slow or halt economic growth in Asia and significantly reduce trade, especially of services. This could mean that New Zealand’s economy is particularly vulnerable given its dependence on exports.
A 2006 New Zealand Treasury paper estimated that a pandemic with fatality rates similar to the 1958 and 1968 pandemics would reduce GDP by approximately 0.7 to 2.1% in the first year, an impact similar to a typical business cycle downturn. Taking into account a typical rate of recovery this would accumulate over four years to a loss ranging from 1.2 to 2.8 % of one year’s GDP.
What is the relevant legislation?
The Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006 allows the Prime Minister, with the agreement of the Minister of Health to enable special powers. These provisions will become operative if the Prime Minister issues an ‘Epidemic Notice’ in the Gazette. The Prime Minister must first be satisfied that the effects of an outbreak of a stated infectious disease are “likely to disrupt or continue to disrupt essential governmental and business activity in New Zealand (or stated parts of New Zealand) significantly” (section 5 (1)).
The Epidemic Notice activates the special powers of the Medical Officers of Health as covered under section 70 and 71 of the Health Act 1956. The special powers include compulsory medical examination (section 70 (1) (e)) and detention powers through the use of isolation and quarantine (section 70 (1) (f)). Acting under Sections 71A of the Health Act 1956 the Police also have special powers to do anything reasonably necessary (including the use of force) to assist Medical Officers of Health. People failing to comply with orders made under Sections 70 and 71 of the Health Act 1956 will face imprisonment for up to 6 months, a fine of up to $4000, or both (Section 72).
See also the Ministry of Health Pandemic influenza legislation.
Pacific islands Countries and Territories
The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that the impact of the Influenza A (H1N1) virus in the Pacific Islands could be worse than other countries given the limited stretch of their health care and essential services.
The Pacific Regional Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Project (PRIPPP) has been designed to build the capacity of Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs) to deal with the potential threat of emerging infectious diseases, in particular pandemic influenza. Influenza A (H1N1) is one such threat. The project is implemented by Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in collaboration with WHO, the World Animal Health Organization (OIE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and with financial assistance from AusAID and NZAID. It covers 22 Pacific Island Countries and Territories.
Samoa's Ministry of Health has confirmed its first swine flu case after tests on a visiting Australian student returned positive
.
Peter Quin, Research Analyst
Social Policy Team
Parliamentary Library
For more information contact Peter (ext.9019)
Swine flu updated june.pdf [PDF 271k]
Copy of Timeline of human Influenza A (H1N1) confirmed cases and deaths from first reported cases.xls [XLS 71k]
|
|
Immigration chronology: selected events 1840-2008
14 April 2008
New Zealand pre-1840
The Māori people of Aotearoa (New Zealand) are descendants of Polynesian peoples who had arrived by 1300 AD. There is debate over the precise date and the number of vessels, but Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand refers to ocean-going waka (canoes) having journeyed during the 1200s from east Polynesia to land on New Zealand’s coast. Fifty years after Captain James Cook’s arrival in 1769 less than 200 Europeans had settled in New Zealand, whereas there were around 100,000 Māori. As early as 1792, whalers arrived as temporary visitors, and the first mission station was set up by Samuel Marsden after his arrival under the auspices of the Anglican Church Missionary Society in 1814. During the late 1820s the number of non-Māori living in New Zealand began to increase, and by 1839 totalled about 2,000 (Māori numbered about 100,000). Two-thirds lived in the North Island with a large majority being single men. An estimated 90 percent were of British background and of these almost seven in ten were English.
Early assisted European settlement and restrictions on Chinese
1840
Approximately 1,000 English settlers arrived in the first wave of the New Zealand Company settlement of Wellington. Of the 18,000 settlers who came directly from Britain between 1840 and 1852, about 14,000 arrived through the Company or its successors. As a result of its policy, by 1852 there were approximately 28,000 Europeans in New Zealand.
1860s
The gold rush brought an influx of migrants from Australia.
1866
New Zealand admitted its first Chinese market gardeners.
1867
Legislation was passed to prevent the introduction into New Zealand of convicted felons and other persons undergoing sentence of transportation.
1870
The Immigration and Public Works Act 1870 was part of the expanded programme of immigration and public works associated with Colonial Treasurer Julius Vogel. Under this an Agent General was appointed in London over the agents acting for various provinces.
1873
The Government offered free passage to European immigrants.
1874
The biggest year in the 19th century for immigration as 32,118 assisted settlers arrived.
1875
The annual migrant intake declined to less than 12,000, and the following year fell further to 5,000. From 1888 to 1891 only 764 assisted migrants were brought to New Zealand.
Reference Number: PUBL_0119_1878_13.TIF
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
1881
The regulation of Chinese immigration commenced with the Chinese Immigrants Act 1881.
1882
The Imbecile Passengers Act 1882 required a bond from the person responsible for a ship that discharged any person ‘lunatic, idiotic, deaf, dumb, blind or infirm’ who might become a charge on public or charitable institutions.
1890s
High numbers of Dalmatian immigrants began arriving.
1890
The New Zealand Government discontinued the practice of New Zealand residents nominating particular people, such as near relatives, for concessional passages. It was reintroduced in a modified form in 1906.
1892
For the first time since assisted-passage schemes were introduced in the 1870s, there were no assisted migrants. It was not until 1903 that assisted passages were again offered.
1899
The Immigration Restriction Act 1899 further restricted Asiatic immigration. Prohibited immigrants included any ‘idiot’ or ‘insane’ person, as well as those suffering from contagious diseases.
Continued assisted migration and end of Chinese restrictions
1907
The Chinese Immigrants Amendment Act 1907 expressly provided that it was not lawful for any Chinese to land in New Zealand until it had been proven to the satisfaction of the Collector of Customs that they were able to read a printed passage of not less than 100 words of the English language selected at the discretion of the Collector.
1919
About 3,000 wives of New Zealand soldiers who married abroad and their 600 children arrived during the demobilisation after World War One.
The Undesirable Immigrants Exclusion Act 1919 gave the Attorney–General the power to prohibit the landing in New Zealand of undesirable, disaffected, or disloyal persons and to order such persons to leave.
1920
The Immigration Restriction Amendment Act 1920 proclaimed the principle of free entry for people of British or Irish birth or descent. Other nationalities were allowed entry only at the discretion of the Minister.
1923
From 1923 applications for naturalisation could be made to the Minister of Internal Affairs by aliens (non-Britons) of ‘good character’ who had lived in New Zealand for at least three years, had ‘an adequate knowledge of the English language’, and did not have any ‘disability’.
1927–47
The number of people who received assistance to migrate to New Zealand was limited. Only 50 immigrants received financial assistance over the decade to March 1946.
1928
From 1928 people who had been naturalised anywhere in the Empire automatically became British subjects in New Zealand. Conversely, anyone naturalised in New Zealand enjoyed the rights of British subjects anywhere in the Empire. People seeking to be naturalised had to have lived in the Empire for five years and in New Zealand for at least one year before they applied.
1934
From 1934 the tax on Chinese immigrants was waived by the Minister of Customs (it was finally repealed in 1944).
1944
New Zealand accepted 82 adult and 755 child refugees from Poland.
Reference Number: 003624.TIF
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
1945
A Dominion Population Committee was appointed to study ways of increasing the country’s population. The Committee supported migration, preferably from Britain, of those who could work in secondary and tertiary industries.
Post–World War Two assisted settlement
1947
The Government introduced an assisted-passage scheme for British and Irish citizens. British ex-servicemen received the most favourable treatment. Child immigration brought 530 children to New Zealand before the scheme ended in 1953. In 1950 the policy was amended to extend the categories of British citizens eligible for assistance. It also provided for pacts with other countries for the migration of single men and women aged 20 to 35 years.
1948
The British Nationality and New Zealand Citizenship Act 1948 gave New Zealand citizenship to all current New Zealand residents who had been either born or naturalised as British subjects.
1949–52
The Government accepted 4,582 displaced Europeans as refugees. The Government also accepted displaced persons who arrived on International Refugee Organisation ships.
Reference Number: 114_308_08.TIF
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
1952
The number of Dutch immigrants arriving increased from 55 in 1950-1951 to over 2,700 as a result of an agreement with the Netherlands. The peak years were between July 1951 and June 1954, when an intake of 10,583 settlers was recorded.
1956
Following an uprising in Hungary the Government agreed to a quota of 1,000 Hungarian refugees. The quota was later increased to 1,300.
1959
New Zealand became one of the first countries in the world to accept refugee families with ‘handicapped’ members. ‘Handicapped’ refugees were those regarded as hard to settle for various reasons. These included ill health, disability, advanced age, or having large numbers of dependent children.
1960
Immigration policies were changed to allow recruitment of more skilled workers for essential industries.
1962
From January 1962, all persons other than New Zealand citizens were required to be in possession of entry permits before landing in New Zealand.
Reference Number: EP_1963_0437.TIF
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
1964
The Immigration Act 1964 largely consolidated the basic structure of immigration law. The concept of prohibited immigrants was retained and, unless specifically exempted, all persons entering New Zealand were required to hold a permit (British, Canadian and Irish citizens were initially exempted but from 1974 also came under the permit system). A pre-condition to removal from New Zealand was prosecution for an offence under the Act, conviction, and the making of an order by the Court that the offender be deported.
1970
A special Samoa immigration quota was introduced. In addition to those entering under normal immigration arrangements up to 1,100 Samoans were allowed to be granted permanent residence annually.
1973
In response to a labour shortage in the early 1970s, an assisted passage scheme and publicity to attract migrants contributed to a record inflow of immigrants in 1973 and 1974. Many of these migrants were from the Pacific Islands. However, by this time the labour shortage had eased, and the Government started a major review of immigration policy.
The Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement allowed Australian and New Zealand citizens to enter each other’s countries (to visit, live, work or remain indefinitely) without having to apply for a permit.
Tighter regulations and end of assisted migration
1974
The first 112 Vietnamese refugees were accepted. Many people fled Vietnam and Cambodia in the 1970s on small and often unseaworthy vessels. These people were called ‘boat people’. In 1977, 412 ‘boat people’ were resettled in New Zealand.
The Government’s review of immigration policy was released. The review led to the end of unrestricted access for British immigrants. It reaffirmed the free access to New Zealand of those born in the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. It also stated that Western Samoa, as a territory formerly administered by New Zealand, held a special place in the policy. Australians continued to have unrestricted access. Other immigrants had to apply for residence under family, humanitarian, refugee or general grounds. The General Category required immigrants to be selected from traditional source countries (mostly in Europe). The selection criteria included skills and qualifications.
Reference Number: EP_1979_1669_8.TIF
Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand
1975
Assisted immigration ended. In the preceding 20 years, over 82,000 assisted and subsidised migrants had arrived. Of these, 93 percent were British and 4 percent were Dutch. The rest were Austrians, Danes, Germans, Swiss, Greeks and other Europeans.
1976
Following attempts from 1972 to locate and deport Polynesians with expired work-permits the Government opened a register to allow illegal immigrants to legalise their status without penalty.
1977
The Citizenship Act 1977 imposed the same requirements on all people who applied for citizenship by grant regarding length of residence in New Zealand, character, and knowledge of the English language.
1978
The Government announced that from February 1 temporary visitors would no longer be permitted to work unless they had specific authority.
1982
The Privy Council reinterpreted the 1923 and 1928 British Nationality and Status of Aliens (in New Zealand) Acts. These allowed for the naturalisation of residents of Western Samoa, who were exempted from the usual English language requirement. The Privy Council ruled that all Western Samoans born between 1924 and 1948 were British subjects. The Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 overturned the Privy Council ruling. However, all Western Samoan citizens who were in New Zealand on 14 September 1982, and those subsequently granted permanent residence, became entitled to New Zealand citizenship.
1985
The first working holiday scheme was introduced. The scheme was between New Zealand and Japan.
Migrant categories and increased focus on skilled migrants
1986
The Immigration Policy Review of 1986 symbolised a major change from the earlier focus on nationality and ethnic origin as the basis for admitting immigrants. Instead of this any person who met specified educational, business, professional, age, or asset requirements was to be admitted regardless of race or nationality. From the review came the Immigration Act 1987. This discarded source country criteria, although Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents could still enter New Zealand freely. Migrants who applied for residence under the General Category had to have skills contained in the Occupational Priority List to be approved for residence. A Business Immigration Policy also allowed migrants with proven business ability and investment capital to be accepted.
1989
June – The Minister of Immigration confirmed that New Zealand would accept a target of up to 1,000 Indo-Chinese refugees over the next three years. More than 9,000 refugees had resettled in New Zealand since 1977.
1990
December – The Minister of Immigration announced that a working party was to be established to advise on the implementation of the Government’s immigration policy.
1991
March – The working party’s report on immigration was completed. The recommendations included: replacement of the occupational priority list with a points system; tighter controls on investment by business migrants; the establishment of a marketing section to promote New Zealand as a destination for migrants and improving relationships between the service and consultants; and stronger measures to ensure better compliance with immigration laws and to deal with ‘over-stayers’.
November – The Immigration Amendment Act 1991 came into effect. A formal right of appeal against declined residence applications was enshrined in legislation for the first time. The Act established two independent appeal bodies (the Residence Appeal Authority and the Removal Review Authority). Potential migrants could apply under the General, Business Investment, Humanitarian, and Family Categories. The General Category was replaced by the General Skills Category in 1995.
1995
July – Policy changes announced included: a more rigorous definition of investment; and the requirement for statutory registration of professionals seeking to practice in New Zealand (such as doctors) with the appropriate statutory body before they could gain points for their qualifications.
1997
New Zealand reduced its refugee quota from 800 a year to 750 and agreed to pay travel costs.
1998
May – The Immigration (Migrant Levy) Amendment Act 1998 introduced the migrant levy.
October – Key policy changes were announced. These included: the abolishment of the English language bond introduced in 1995 and replacement with pre-purchased English language training; recognition of all work experience for General Skills Category points; a new Entrepreneur Category for residence; a new Long-Term Business Visa; a new Investor Category to replace the Business Investor Category; and streamlined processes for investors.
1999
April – Under the Immigration Amendment Act 1999 there were faster removal procedures for people in New Zealand unlawfully without a permit. The Act also tightened judicial review procedures, and provided a statutory base for the determination of refugee status in accordance with New Zealand’s obligations under the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
Focus on talents and skills
2000
January – The establishment of a Ministerial Advisory Group to advise the Immigration Minister on immigration policy and settlement issues was announced.
June – The Government indicated the number of Working Holiday Visas would double to 20,000 places per year.
2001
September – The Government announced changes to the way it managed residence approvals with the introduction of the New Zealand Immigration Programme. The new system set the total number of residence approvals at 45,000 each year for the next three years. It also introduced three residence approval streams that operated independently of each other.
December – Under announced immigration initiatives a Talent Visa was to be introduced whereby accredited employers could recruit highly talented and skilled individuals to boost their access to global skills and knowledge.
2002
February – Migrants seeking residence started to receive a points premium for job offers that were relevant to their qualifications or work experience.
July – The Pacific Access Category (a permanent residence annual quota) was established. The Refugee Family Sponsored Category was added to the International Humanitarian Stream.
2003
November – Cabinet agreed to the national Immigration Settlement Strategy for migrants, refugees and their families. The Strategy’s six goals for migrants and refugees included the obtaining of employment appropriate to their qualifications and skills.
December – The Skilled Migrant Category commenced. The policy promoted the active recruitment of skilled migrants to New Zealand.
2004
May – The Immigration Settlement Strategy was announced. This aimed to help migrants settle better by addressing issues such as access to education, health, housing and employment.
August – Measures aimed at enabling Pacific Island quotas to be filled were announced. These included swifter verification of job offers and the release of quota places throughout the year rather than during just one month.
2005
April – The Citizenship Amendment Act 2005 increased the standard period of residence in New Zealand from three years to five years, and removed the provision for special treatment for the spouses of New Zealand citizens. This meant that applicants for the grant of citizenship who were married to New Zealand citizens would be required to meet the five-year residency period.
The Passports Amendment Act 2005 reduced the validity of adult passports from ten years to five years, allowed information to be disclosed for border security purposes, and provided for the cancellation or refusal to issue New Zealand passports and travel documents in cases where national security was threatened.
2006
January – From 1 January children born in New Zealand (or in the Cook Islands, Niue or Tokelau) acquired New Zealand citizenship at birth only if at least one of their parents was a New Zealand citizen, was entitled to be in New Zealand indefinitely in terms of the Immigration Act 1987, or was entitled to reside indefinitely in the Cook Islands, Tokelau or Niue.
2007
May – The Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 required the mandatory licensing of all immigration advisers. It became an offence to provide immigration advice without a license, unless exempt.
July – The revised New Zealand Settlement Strategy was launched. This realigned the 2004 New Zealand Settlement Strategy to the Government’s strategic priorities through its Call to Action for settlement.
August – The Government’s Immigration Bill was tabled in Parliament. The would replace the Immigration Act 1987 and proposed a simplified visa system, more flexible powers to enforce immigration law, and the ability to collect and use biometric information.
November – The Active Investor Migrant Policy opened. There were three categories: Global Investor; Professional Investor; and General (Active) Investor.
2008
February – Changes to the Skilled Migrant Category deferred in November 2006 were introduced. The changes primarily affected the assessment of whether an applicant's job or job offer was 'skilled employment', and which qualifications were recognised.
March – A new policy took effect whereby transit visas were required for all travel via New Zealand, regardless of where the traveller came from or their destination, unless that person was specifically exempted by New Zealand’s immigration policy.
April – The New Zealand–China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) aimed to make it easier for New Zealand and Chinese nationals to enter each other’s country for a temporary stay related to the supply of services. For instance, the FTA provided for up to 1,800 skilled people from China to work temporarily in New Zealand at any one time under the new policies, provided they met the requirements and had a job offer. It also provided for up to 1,000 young people from China to be granted a working holiday visa each year.
Birthplaces of New Zealand’s population 1858–2006
Please note that the tables below are not directly comparable given differences in the data sources.
Birthplaces of people living in New Zealand (exclusive of Māori) 1858
Results of a census of the Colony of New Zealand taken for the night of the 3rd of March, 1878, George Didsbury, Wellington, 1880, p.226.
Ten most common birthplaces of people living in New Zealand (exclusive of Māori) 1901
* This is the total population figure of 772,719 excluding the total figure of the ten most common countries.
Results of a census of the Colony of New Zealand taken for the night of the 31st of March, 1878, John Mackay, Wellington, 1902, p.124.
Ten most common birthplaces by country of birth 1961
* This figure includes New Zealand’s Island Territories (the Cook Islands, 3,374; Niue Island, 1,414; and the Tokelau Islands, 23).
New Zealand Census 1961, Volume 6 – Birthplaces and duration of residence of persons born overseas, Department of Statistics, Wellington, 1964, pp.6-7.
** This is the total population figure of 2,414,984 excluding the total figure of the ten most common countries.
Usually resident population by ten most common countries of birth 2006
Quick stats about culture and identity, Statistics New Zealand, 18 April 2007. Available from http://www.stats.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/5F1F873C-5D36-4E54-9405-34503A2C0AF6/0/quickstatsaboutcultureandidentity.pdf
* This figure includes the Australian External Territories.
** This is the total population figure of 4,027,947 excluding the total figure of the ten most common countries.
Other: Wales and unspecified.
Other: China, Sweden and Norway, Denmark and possessions, and other
Other: Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Wales, India, Western Samoa, and other
Suggestions for further reading/links
Gordon McLauchlan, Michael King, Hamish Keith, Ranginui Walker, and Laurie Barber, The New Zealand Book of Events. Reed Methuen Publishers Ltd, Auckland, 1986.
Government media releases. Available from http://www.beehive.govt.nz/
Immigration New Zealand, Department of Labour, ‘Latest News’.
Available from http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/general/generalinformation/news/
Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of
New Zealand, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
Available from http://www.teara.govt.nz/en
The author would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand.
Paul Bellamy, Research Analyst
For more information, contact at ext. 9204
Parliamentary Library
Immigration chronology: selected events 1840-2008 [PDF 1007k]
|
|
Indonesia's new government: stability at last?
Indonesia's new government: stability at last? [PDF 352k]
|
Inflation targeting
To read the full research paper download the PDF document.
Executive summary
-
Since New Zealand first introduced inflation targeting in the late 1980s, a growing number of other countries have adopted it to operate their monetary policy.
-
A main feature of inflation targeting is commitment to maintaining price stability. In practice this has meant central banks aiming for a low and stable inflation rate.
-
The pursuit of price stability is recognition that high and volatile inflation is harmful to an economy. The negative economic impact of high inflation can occur whether or not the inflation is anticipated in the expectations of households and firms. Deflation—a negative inflation rate—also presents substantial economic risks. Consequently, most inflation targeting economies have avoided targeting a zero inflation rate.
-
In New Zealand’s case, the previous 0-3% target range for annual inflation was narrowed to 1-3% in mid-September 2002, but with the additional flexibility of requiring the Reserve Bank to aim to keep annual inflation within this range on average over the medium term.
-
The narrowing of New Zealand’s inflation target range aligns it more closely to common practice among other low inflation economies who have also used explicit inflation targeting over the past decade, such as Australia, Canada and Sweden. There has especially been a policy convergence with Australian policy through the adoption of averaging target outcomes over the medium term.
-
The very existence of a target range reflects the difficulty of accurately forecasting inflation. This is due to long and variable time lags between the implementation of a monetary policy stance and its ultimate impact on the inflation rate. For New Zealand, this lag of policy transmission can take up to two years.
-
Over short periods of around a year, the Reserve Bank can influence economic activity. Beyond that time, monetary policy only significantly affects the inflation rate and not other real economic variables such as economic growth and employment.
-
Economists believe there is a threshold inflation rate above which sustainable economic growth is detrimentally affected. Recent research suggests the threshold may be an annual inflation rate around 3%, but results of various studies differ.
Inflation targeting [PDF 920k]
|
|
Inflation targets: an outline of the issues
Inflation targets: an outline of the issues [PDF 287k]
|
Insurance and reinsurance issues after the Canterbury earthquakes
December 2011
There have been more claims and affected policyholders as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes than from any other insurance event in New Zealand, and the insurance cost of the earthquakes far exceeds the cost of all previous disasters in New Zealand. The complexity of the Canterbury earthquake claims settlement process, due to many aftershock events, means that there is considerable uncertainty about the timing of insurance claim settlements.
Insurance cover is provided by several insurers including the Earthquake Commission, private insurers and reinsurers.
Earthquake Commission
The Earthquake Commission (EQC) is a government owned Crown entity that provides primary natural disaster insurance to the owners of residential properties in New Zealand. A levy is collected from all private insurance premiums and contributes to the EQC’s Natural Disaster Fund. Prior to the Canterbury earthquakes there was $5.6 billion in the Fund. However, in August 2011, the EQC announced that its Natural Disaster Fund is likely to be exhausted by earthquake claims. The Commission pays up to $100,000 + GST for house repairs and $20,000 + GST for contents.
Private insurers
The private insurance sector is characterised by a small number of large insurers with large market share and several smaller providers. One of the larger insurers, AMI Insurance Limited, was particularly affected by a high number of building and household claims after the earthquakes. Concerns surrounding the ability of AMI to meet these claims led to government intervention. In April 2011, the government announced a backup financial support package to give AMI policyholders certainty and to ensure an orderly rebuild of Christchurch in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. The support package will be called on only as a last resort if AMI’s own reserves are completely depleted.
If required, the package will involve the government investing up to $500 million of equity in AMI, with the right to take ownership and assume control of the company if needed. The ultimate cost to the government will depend on the final cost of AMI’s claims, which remain uncertain, and the outcome of AMI’s recapitalisation process which is currently underway. However, Treasury estimates that the likely cost of the support package will be $337 million.
Reinsurance
Reinsurance is insurance that is purchased by an insurance company from another insurance company (referred to as the reinsurer) as a means of risk management. Without the support from reinsurance there would have been either more insurers in financial difficulty as a result of the earthquakes, or reduced levels of insurance coverage. Reinsurance cover will contribute the majority of total funding for property-related insured losses from the Canterbury earthquakes. The remainder will be met by a combination of funding from the EQC and the original private insurers. The EQC also relies heavily on reinsurance to cover a significant proportion of its residential insurance claims.
Distribution of Canterbury earthquake insurance claims
Source: Reserve Bank of New Zealand, Financial Stability Report, November 2011
The reinsurers funding the majority of earthquake claims are large global reinsurers. They generally have strong financial ratings and the ability to absorb the elevated level of global reinsurance claims from a series of recent natural disasters around the world (including the Japanese tsunami, Australian floods and a large earthquake in Chile).
Insurance costs and availability
An important short-term impact of the Canterbury earthquakes has been the reduction in the availability of new insurance in the region. Most businesses and households are unable to change insurers at present. For those currently without insurance cover, the impact is more significant. For example, owners of some earthquake-prone buildings and infrastructure can no longer get insurance cover in Canterbury or elsewhere in New Zealand. Other changes to date include higher premiums to fund increased reinsurance costs and larger excesses. On 11 October 2011, the Government announced that EQC levies would triple from February 2012 to meet EQC’s higher reinsurance costs and begin replenishing the Natural Disaster Fund.
In the long term, insurers and reinsurers will reassess their risks and opportunities in New Zealand. It is expected that this will include the eventual return of an active market for new customers in Canterbury. There will also be a review of EQC within the next few years which could affect the interaction between the public and private provision of insurance for earthquake related risk in New Zealand.
Charles Feltham, Research Services Analyst
Insurance and reinsurance after Canterbury earthquakes [PDF 210k]
|
