Migration top 10 essential skills, 2014/15 numbers
Chef Dairy cattle farmer Cafe/restaurant manager Retail manager (general) Carpenter 2283 1596 975 924 901 Dairy cattle farm worker 806 Retail supervisor 797 Aged or disabled carer 731 Truck driver (general) 401 Registered nurse (aged care) 372 workforce or in capital,” they said.
This is the crucial point.
Helping employers to bring in low-skilled migrants instead of investing in new technology and becoming more productive so they can pay local workers more is essentially stunting our productivity and real GDP per capita.
In rejecting New Zealand First’s calls to slash migration, John Key said in Parliament this week the Government did not always accept Treasury’s advice: “I think New Zealand is a far better and richer country for having migration in the way that we do.”
“Yes, it puts some pressure on the system and we just simply need to fund that or build more houses,” he said.
Key is right about the pressures on the system and the need for more houses, but he is wrong about our recent migration patterns making the country richer. It has made some richer by pushing up land prices in Auckland and beyond, but it has led to stagnant wage and real GDP growth and has lumped a big upfront infrastructure bill on to taxpayers in general and Auckland rate payers in particular.
I’ve called in the past for the Productivity Commission to analyse the effects of our migration on the economy, similar to analysis done by Australia’s Productivity Commission last year.
That Australian analysis is yet to be published, but the early findings were that a migration shock, particularly a low-skill one like we have had, wouldn’t boost productivity much.
That local analysis is needed more than ever. Key is reluctant to take Treasury’s advice about the need for skilled migrants. Perhaps he would listen to the Productivity Commission.
HWhat’s your view? letters@hos.co.nz