Village residents don’t have time to keep waiting for law reform

Monday, 25 November 2024

Nigel Matthews is chief executive for RVResidents, a residents association with over 12,500 members in more than 375 villages across New Zealand.

OPINION: When some legislation can be rushed through in a matter of weeks or months, it begs the question - why is the retirement villages review expected to take 10+ years?

That’s what I hear being asked by a vulnerable demographic that has been waiting over 10 years for the 20-plus-years-old legislation to be reviewed. Retirees are extremely frustrated that a review - recommended as urgent in 2022 by the Retirement Commissioner - has been given an “indicative timeframe” of 2027/2028 before any bill might see formal assent into law.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t include a lead-in period that is likely to be demanded from some in the sector, to allow them more time to get ready for change. So, in reality, we could be looking at 2030.

More than 53,000 people live in retirement villages across the country. Meetings recently held by RVResidents, the national association representing residents, have heard many attendees state they may not be around to see any changes.

It’s estimated that over 30,000 people will have either passed away or moved into care while waiting for their rights and voice to be heard. Victims of an imbalanced legislation and “unfair terms”.

Dick Williams, aged 93, and a past secretary for the RVResidents, has made a plea on YouTube to the Government saying that the indicative timeframe means he will be almost 100.

“Please don’t make the rest of us wait that long.”

Labour MP Ingrid Leary put five questions to Seniors Minister Casey Costello in the House last week. She asked: “What actions did [Costello] take, if any, when associate housing minister Tama Potaka advised officials in May to progress the long overdue retirement villages act review that she committed to with him with a ‘lighter touch’?”

The response was: “I have engaged strongly with the Retirement Village Association (RVA) and the Residents Association to ensure we achieve positive outcomes. This is a tough issue to deal with, and we have found common ground…”

Yes, the minister and NZ First have engaged directly with us. I have to say, as one of five delegates to recently meet with Minister Costello and deputy Prime Minister Peters, we were humbled when Peters continued past the normally strict 30 minute time slot for a further 25 minutes - asking more questions and making observations. I came away thinking: “He gets it.”

But this “common ground”? One of us must be living in an alternate reality, because I know that of the majority of issues that we’ve tried to discuss with the operators association, and that are up for legislative consideration, there is very little common ground. Please, where is this Universe of Common Ground you speak of?

Repairs and maintenance of chattels, complaints/disputes, and repayment of a resident’s capital after exit - the three big issues - the operators association have repeatedly said are not up for discussion, or they simply defer the conversation, citing the need for more “evidence” or further cost-benefit analysis.

A recent “United for Seniors” campaign run by RVResidents and supported by other large not-for-profit organisations, gave them plenty of evidence, including first hand testimonials, but I guess it’s hard to hear when you don’t want to listen.

Brian Peat, the president of RVResidents, says: “Instead of explaining why this urgent legislative change has been delayed for another five years we’re told the way to resolve the David and Goliath power imbalance between the village owners and the residents will be through negotiation and common ground. That hasn’t occurred in the past five years, so how is it going to suddenly happen now?

“The law skews power heavily in favour of the village owners, leaving residents without adequate consumer protections, and no amount of negotiation is going to fix that because it’s a clear case of market failure that will continue to occur due to perverse drivers.”

Last week's questions in the House only raised more questions.

Residents have asked me: is the minister walking back her support for progressing the review of the Retirement Villages Act? Is this just the Government kicking the can further down the road because they think we’re all “happy” and “wealthy”? Why hasn’t NZ First demanded National honour its coalition agreement; or do you think vested sector interests have more sway than any coalition agreement?

As for answers, I guess only time will tell - something this generation of retirement village residents doesn't have much of.