green ice

There are rumors that the NZ passmark of 30 points might decrease to 27 early next year and up to 26 later next year, how true is this?

Svend

"green ice" wrote in message
news:450885.1035252241@britishexpats-
.com...
    > There are rumors that the NZ passmark of 30 points might decrease to 27
    > early next year and up to 26 later next year, how true is this


Being a NZ PR,i was listening to the radio today as usual,whilst driving the
tractor and Winston Peters(a politician against immigration)was having
another go at the immigration minister who said something to the effect of
applications are at their highest and things are only going to get harder to
get in.Having heard that and seeing your question as my wife was browsing
this NG i felt you should know that its probably not going to go down.I may
be wrong !!!!:-(

jseni01d

The only answer is to wait and see. Many people on this forum have predicted that the government will not get enough PR applicants to reach its target next year (48,000, I believe) if the passmark stays at 30/29/28. On the other hand, the NZIS and, according to Svend, the Immigration Minister, seem to be saying that even at 30 points they are getting plenty of applications.

Best guess: The passmark will remain very high for a while yet. If/when NZIS clears the backlog of applications, and IF they find they have only granted, say, 20,000 PR visas in the first 9 months of next year, then they will reduce the passmark by one point at a time until they get enough applications to reach their quota. I doubt they will make the mistake of suddenly slashing it to 26 and being swamped with thousands of applications.

We're in the same situation as you. We have 25-27 points (depending on NZQA assessments. Probably 26.) and would love to know if/when that will be enough. I have 23 months until I turn 30, so hopefully some time in the next 2 years. However, with NZ looking increasingly like one of the few safe places on earth, with a new Lord of the Rings film due out soon - complete with stunning NZ scenery no doubt - and with the NZ economy growing faster than any other industrialized nation, I'm not optimistic about the number of applications dropping any time soon.

John,
Tokyo

Jaj

It will only go down if they do something else to reduce the number of
people qualifying, like for example imposing a tougher English
language requirement (IELTS 7.0 or even higher), or restricting
immigration to a specific list of occupations.

Jeremy

    >On Tue, 22 Oct 2002 17:10:56 +1300, "Svend" wrote:
    >"green ice" wrote in message
    >news:450885.1035252241@britishexpat-
    >s.com    ...
    >> There are rumors that the NZ passmark of 30 points might decrease to 27
    >> early next year and up to 26 later next year, how true is this
    >Being a NZ PR,i was listening to the radio today as usual,whilst driving the
    >tractor and Winston Peters(a politician against immigration)was having
    >another go at the immigration minister who said something to the effect of
    >applications are at their highest and things are only going to get harder to
    >get in.Having heard that and seeing your question as my wife was browsing
    >this NG i felt you should know that its probably not going to go down.I may
    >be wrong !!!!:-(

Ian Guy

Agree with Sven D - Winston seems to be drumming up support (sadly IMHO)
which is not good for everyone who is trying to come over.

"jseni01d" wrote in message
news:451020.1035265434@britishexpats-
.com...
    > Originally posted by green ice:
    > > There are rumors that the NZ passmark of 30 points might decrease to
    > > 27 early next year and up to 26 later next year, how true is this?
    > >
    > The only answer is to wait and see. Many people on this forum have
    > predicted that the government will not get enough PR applicants to reach
    > its target next year (48,000, I believe) if the passmark stays at
    > 30/29/28. On the other hand, the NZIS and, according to Svend, the
    > Immigration Minister, seem to be saying that even at 30 points they are
    > getting plenty of applications.
    > Best guess: The passmark will remain very high for a while yet. If/when
    > NZIS clears the backlog of applications, and IF they find they have only
    > granted, say, 20,000 PR visas in the first 9 months of next year, then
    > they will reduce the passmark by one point at a time until they get
    > enough applications to reach their quota. I doubt they will make the
    > mistake of suddenly slashing it to 26 and being swamped with thousands
    > of applications.
    > We're in the same situation as you. We have 25-27 points (depending on
    > NZQA assessments. Probably 26.) and would love to know if/when that will
    > be enough. I have 23 months until I turn 30, so hopefully some time in
    > the next 2 years. However, with NZ looking increasingly like one of the
    > few safe places on earth, with a new Lord of the Rings film due out soon
    > - complete with stunning NZ scenery no doubt - and with the NZ economy
    > growing faster than any other industrialized nation, I'm not optimistic
    > about the number of applications dropping any time soon.
    > John,
    > Tokyo
    > --

Ppp

"Ian Guy" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
o.nz...
    > Agree with Sven D - Winston seems to be drumming up support (sadly IMHO)
    > which is not good for everyone who is trying to come over.

He's getting support because of the excessive level of immigration from the
third world. Even Latte Dalziel is starting to get the message which is why the
qualifying points level is going up. If they want to get the backlog down, it's
simple. Just throw 90% of the applications from India and China in the bin.
There, problem solved.

Ernie Trish

"ppp" wrote in message news:...
    > "Ian Guy" wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Agree with Sven D - Winston seems to be drumming up support (sadly IMHO)
    > > which is not good for everyone who is trying to come over.
    >
    > He's getting support because of the excessive level of immigration from the
    > third world. Even Latte Dalziel is starting to get the message which is why the
    > qualifying points level is going up. If they want to get the backlog down, it's
    > simple. Just throw 90% of the applications from India and China in the bin.
    > There, problem solved.

I have been interested in immigrating to NZ from US.

As you mention a majority of NZ's immigration is from the 3rd
world and the 3rd world has no economy so the people have no good
experience (despite desperate clamor otherwise. ... Iv'e done too
much travel to debate the issue). Comparatively speaking, I have
a first class situation (ivy league education, 12 year IT career
working for only the best investment banks on Wall Street, have
$US 150,000 to bring to NZ, etc.).

Despite my qualification, I have about 27-28 points, primarily
because of my age. Can you answer a question for me? Does NZ
immigration hold steady on their criteria or will 'special consideration'
be given to my otherwise better qualification than most of the 3rd
world applicants?

Thanks,

Ernie

Sandra

Please lets hope 'Ernie' is a troll

otherwise there is little hope for NZ future with 'quality' immigrants like this!!!!

Regards

Don

Ernie - first of all let me say I don't like your attitude about immigrants from developing economies and your post struck me as immature and arrogant. Enough said.

Your qualification is either on the NZIS list of automatically accepted qualifications or else it will be assessed by NZQA. No special consideration will be given to your qualification and it will be assessed according to standard NZIS/ NZQA criteria, ie compared to qualifications obtainable in NZ. Ivy League does not give you any advantage.

Cath

On 1 Nov 2002 03:01:08 -0800, [email protected] (Ernie Trish) wrote:
[msge snipped]

    >I have been interested in immigrating to NZ from US.
    >As you mention a majority of NZ's immigration is from the 3rd
    >world and the 3rd world has no economy so the people have no good
    >experience (despite desperate clamor otherwise. ... Iv'e done too
    >much travel to debate the issue). Comparatively speaking, I have
    >a first class situation (ivy league education, 12 year IT career
    >working for only the best investment banks on Wall Street, have
    >$US 150,000 to bring to NZ, etc.).
    >Despite my qualification, I have about 27-28 points, primarily
    >because of my age. Can you answer a question for me? Does NZ
    >immigration hold steady on their criteria or will 'special consideration'
    >be given to my otherwise better qualification than most of the 3rd
    >world applicants?
    >Thanks,
    >Ernie

Your qualifications will be assessed by NZQA and no, there are no
'special considerations' - who the hell do you think you are because
your American, have an 'ivy leave ed' etc and probably white?

Suggest you go and take a long vacation to NZ and find out for
yourself how well you will fit in.

Cath

Ppp

"Cath" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > On 1 Nov 2002 03:01:08 -0800, [email protected] (Ernie Trish) wrote:
    > [msge snipped]
    > >I have been interested in immigrating to NZ from US.
    > >
    > >As you mention a majority of NZ's immigration is from the 3rd
    > >world and the 3rd world has no economy so the people have no good
    > >experience (despite desperate clamor otherwise. ... Iv'e done too
    > >much travel to debate the issue). Comparatively speaking, I have
    > >a first class situation (ivy league education, 12 year IT career
    > >working for only the best investment banks on Wall Street, have
    > >$US 150,000 to bring to NZ, etc.).
    > >
    > >Despite my qualification, I have about 27-28 points, primarily
    > >because of my age. Can you answer a question for me? Does NZ
    > >immigration hold steady on their criteria or will 'special consideration'
    > >be given to my otherwise better qualification than most of the 3rd
    > >world applicants?
    > >
    > >Thanks,
    > >
    > >Ernie
    > Your qualifications will be assessed by NZQA and no, there are no
    > 'special considerations' - who the hell do you think you are because
    > your American, have an 'ivy leave ed' etc and probably white?

And that's exactly what's wrong with NZ's immigration policy. Brings in
thousands of third world taxi drivers while discouraging the sort of immigrants
(see above) we really need.

Stupid political correctness gone mad.

BritboyNZ

I'd agree with John, NZIS are already over their quota for this year by several thousand. It wouldn't suprise me if these extra approvals are 'carried over' into next years quota, which would reduce the number of approvals they grant in 03/04. NZIS have received a lot of flak here in NZ this year about how hopeless they have been in managing the system. I very much doubt they will want to get themselves into the same mess next year. I reckon the passmark will stay high & other requirements will be tightened up (probably language/health). Pretty depressing picture I admit, but thats how I see it :-(

jseni01d

I reckon the key for many prospective NZ immigrants on this list is the language thing. If they raise the IELTS requirement to 7 instead of 5, it would probably close the door on a lot of immigrants from China and South Korea, two of the top sources of immigrants in recent years. It would be a much more effective way of cutting the numbers than raising the passmark, since there's no way round it other than spending a lot of time and money studying English and taking the exam. There would then be a lot more places available in the NZIS quota for native speakers of English (which includes 90% of people on this list, I assume), and in time the passmark might come down in order for NZIS to meet their targets. Without a rise in the English requirement, I can't see any chance of a lower passmark in the foreseeable future.

While NZIS review their rules, perhaps they could add a clause barring snobby Americans who think they're better than others because they went to Harvard or Yale (Did anyone see Jeff Skilling, one of the main villains of the Enron scandal, being questioned in Congress about where he learned his "creative" accounting skills. The look on his face as he said "Harvard Business School" was a sight to savour.) On second thoughts, it might be fun to see how Ernie gets on making friends in NZ with his breathtaking arrogance.

John
Tokyo

BritboyNZ

I'm not so sure that would actually be the case...a lot of chinese, korean, malaysians and so on actually come to NZ to learn english anyway. Auckland has the highest proportion of english language schools in the pacific, yes increasing the IELTS score it would make it harder for older chinese/koreans, but the vast majority of asians you see walking round Auckland are youngsters who have come here on student permits, learnt english/done a degree here & then applied for a work permit or PR. Once they have been here 2 years, they're then eligible to bring family members over under the provisions of the family quota.

Making the english language requirement harder would be a good thing, for one it would definitely help migrants integrate into NZ society better which can only be good & yes in the short term it would probably help people on this forum as initially I suspect there would be a lull in PR applications. I doubt it would make NZ a less attractive destination though. Another thing you might not be aware of is that if your IELTS score is within a certain range of the IELTS passmark, you can actually pay NZIS to arrange english language tuition for you which is probably an avenue more people would take if the score was raised. Be interesting to see what changes the govt/NZIS actually make.

Don

Read this Ernie Irish:

The debatesurrounding immigration presents me with a conflict of interest. As a teacher and researcher of politics I generally like to preserve at least an aura of independence and objectivity. But I am an immigrant, too.

Of course, I'm not, I suspect, the sort of immigrant that people seem to be worrying about so much lately. Although I wasn't born and bred here, I suspect I'm unlikely to be a target of the sort of stereotyping, suspicion and scaremongering that seems to characterise one side of the political debate on the issue.

I speak the language - true, I draw the line at "choice" and "awesome", but I prefer, say, "rort" and "shonky" to their English equivalents. I have a job - not one it would have been easy to recruit a New Zealander to do - I pay income tax, ACC, GST and plenty of interest to the bank, too.

Anything left at the end of the month tends, of course, to go on my children, who seem to be growing more Kiwi with each passing year. And if helping to coach junior soccer (although I still call it football) counts for anything, I guess I contribute positively to society.

I'm not a health risk. I'm not a bludger. I haven't stolen anyone's job or property. And - unless you count chicken pox, free doctors' visits for the under-6s, and the odd extra cookie from the cookie jar - I haven't brought in any family members likely to infect, scrounge or steal from anyone either.

But nor, of course, have most immigrants. What separates me from them is that I am Pakeha/European/Caucasian or - let's call a spade a spade - white. Which means I fit in without really trying.

Yet under the skin, my background, my culture, my way of seeing the world is probably pretty different from that of most Kiwis. The empty majesty of New Zealand's landscape, its favourite television shows and sports codes leave me lukewarm, if not completely cold. But nobody would pick me out of a crowd, bale me up and accuse me of not "integrating".

If I were Asian or black, though, it would be a different story - even if, before coming here, I'd been born and brought up in England just the same.

Ironically, however, that "sceptred isle", that "precious stone set in the silver sea" which many Kiwis used to call Home might, I reckon, be the source of much of our present discontent. Many who came out here from Britain - especially from the late 1950s onwards - packed their racism along with their shirts, shoes and socks.

I'll always remember an English guy who came to sell me life insurance when I first got to Wellington a few years ago. "Whyd'ya move out here?" I politely asked, expecting the normal blah about opportunity, lifestyle, weather. But no. He was quite clear about it: "It was the blacks. They were moving in. Taking over. Just had enough of it. Had to get away."

Most of those he left behind in England, of course, gradually got used to it - or at least their children and their children's children did. Out here, we hear the headlines about race riots in no-hope northern mill towns or stabbings in housing estates in south London, and wonder whether Enoch Powell - far from being bitter, twisted and mad as a snake - was right to foresee the trouble letting in all those "grinning piccaninnies" would cause.

But the reality of 21st-century England - for all the bloody foaming of New Zealand First Pom Peter Brown - is rather more prosaic and, taken as a whole, pretty positive judging not just on anecdote but also on statistics showing, for instance, the surprising level of intermarriage between white and Afro-Caribbean Brits.

Of course, asylum-seekers from the Middle East and anyone even remotely resembling what English tabloids like to label "gypsies" have it much harder. But that - whether liberals like me like it or not - is the way of the world.

In terms of origin, immigrants, especially those fleeing ongoing persecution or abject poverty, tend to come in waves and be accepted only over time. Sometimes it's a very long time, and the rate of acceptance probably varies with the extent to which they look or sound different, as well as the visibility and distinction of their religious practice.

Afghanis, Iraqis, Somalis and even Chinese do seem to be making the natives restless right now as they crash or slip ashore. But by the time their children's children grow up they may be well on the way to becoming part of the scene - especially if today's generation, as virtually all of them do, keep their heads down (as well as held high), work hard and make the most of it.

By then, most of us hypocritical enough to rely on their work and taxes for our healthcare and superannuation, while at the same time wishing they'd never come, will be long gone.

Would it be too much to hope that the rest of us who are still around will have junked the atavistic attitudes of an England that, in truth, no longer exists outside the imaginations of those who once called it Home?

************************************************** ******

You might not be English, Ernie but you sure are prejudiced.

Don

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=news&thesubsection=&st oryID=2999493&reportID=55514