BUSINESS
Hon. Tracey Martin, former Seniors Minister More than 47,000 New Zealanders now live in retirement villages, and hundreds of people are moving in every week.
HON. TRACY MARTIN Independent Member RVA
22
iven the growing popularity of retirement villages in this country, it is no surprise that there has been more scrutiny on the sector. I saw that first-hand during my time as Seniors Minister in the Labour-New Zealand First Government. Last year, I agreed to become the Independent Member of the Retirement Villages Association’s (RVA) Executive Committee to represent the residents’ point of view. Following my Ministerial portfolio, this was an opportunity to get the view from ‘the ground.’ In taking on the role, I anticipated there would be some challenges. The Retirement Commissioner had released a White Paper that advocated reviewing the retirement village legislative framework. Meanwhile, the RVA, which represents large and small village operators, launched its Blueprint for Change. One of the key aspects of the blueprint is strengthening the voice of residents and ensuring they are heard at RVA’s governance level. It also addresses other issues of concern to residents. Such as weekly fees (fixed or a predictable increase, ceasing when a unit is vacated), committing to making sure operators re-licence vacant units as quickly as possible, and ensuring the terms around transfers to care are transparent. And the blueprint includes a pledge to address any perceived or real “unfair” clauses in Occupation Right Agreements (ORAs). I was, of course, expecting there would be times when I would have to stand up to the RVA’s Executive Committee to say, “people over profit”, – but I never once had to. I was expecting to meet a good number of residents with significant concerns. However, while many of the residents I met agreed some things needed fixing, most were
very happy with their village life. There are, without a doubt, some issues that need resolving. Still, encouragingly, I found the willingness is there to address them. The sector recognises that if people are not happy, they will not come to live in the villages. But the industry also accepts the need to improve and evolve its offering. The sector has a vast offering. There are opportunities for people to buy into different models, such as fixed fees or not fixed, or with or without capital gains. The sector is genuinely trying to deliver on a variety of options. In fact, I would also like to see the state starting a conversation with the sector about its potential to answer housing needs for an even wider range of seniors. I was also surprised at the many myths about the retirement village sector held by those not living in villages. Some think that they are only for those requiring significant care and support, or they are isolated ‘gated communities. They have hidden fees and costs. Or are only for the wealthy; the purchase of ORAs is highly complicated; they make exorbitant profits, and there are no legal protections for residents. Throughout the meetings and after spending time with residents, it was reassuring that most people did not hold these views. I had expected the concept of capital gains to be a burning issue. However, while recognising that some issues need sorting, such as repairs to chattels, it was not seen as a significant problem. It was important to people to leave something for their families, but how they lived their lives in their villages was most important. They appreciated the worry-free lifestyle. The community, the facilities, and simply having weekly fees – in many cases, fixed for life - rather than worrying about the upkeep of their homes and things like rates, insurance and water levies. For many, moving into a retirement village had
