Travel costs: Who is cheaper - NZ, UK or Oz?

03 Aug 2010 07:19p.m.

T - Palmy wrote:

Maternity leave should be a lot more then 14 weeks. I am a new mum and a working mother and 14 weeks is just not long or good enough. Financially either way you lose. It cost a fortune to send babies to daycare when you return back to work but if you don't who do you rely on TAX PAYERS!!!and that is just not fair.

03 Aug 2010 07:11p.m.

Sue O'Sullivan wrote:

I see you are doing a piece on Mums going back to work after having a baby / or family.
As a side topic related to this... do you realise that Registered Nurses risk losing their ability to keep a Practising Certificate - without which no nurse can work. As a result we are losing many of our best Nurses due to this ridiculous rule.
This is both unfair and appears to prejudice those who do wish to have a family and take a break to raise them in their early years!! Why should NZ, who is so short of excellent Nurses, have rules that prevent some of the best being able to easily get back into the work force? Employing (for example) Indian Nurses or Malaysian Nurses instead of encouraging our own back into the work force again.
I agree that updates are necessary - but IF you looked into what one has to accomplish to work again - it is stricter than ANY OTHER parallel Career - by a very long way.

03 Aug 2010 06:07p.m.

Kiwi in USA wrote:

Campbell Live:

Thank you for having a spot on your show with regards to the Peter Bills article in the Herald, “100 per cent Pure rip-off”. I’ve been reading the comments in the Herald with great interest since it came out two weeks.

While I agree with your piece about this I think you may have done it an injustice. I look at the article from two aspects, as to what I believe Peter was aiming at:
1. The outrageous accommodation prices that have been spoken about for Rugby World Cup next year
2. The general cost of living in New Zealand

With regards to N# 1, an article in Herald on March 24 (Price gouge warning for World Cup) spoke about “industry groups having some real concerns” & “New Zealand tarnishing its reputation as a fair nation through greedy accommodation operators cashing in on Rugby World Cup hosting rights”. I believe that was the heart of Peter’s article, the fact that some sectors in NZ seem to see this as a one of off chance to completely gouge anyone who dares to visit next year during the World Cup next year. They should take a step back & take a look at what happened this year at the recent Soccer World Cup in South Africa, accommodations / visitors were dramatically down because of the same reason.

New Zealand businesses should not be short sighted as to what the opportunity might be next year, but look at this as being NZ on the world stage – what better opportunity could New Zealand get than a recommendation from a World Cup visitor in 2011 saying they had a fantastic time, the kiwis were a very welcoming & hospitable people & the businesses had the foresight not to repeat what happened in South Africa this year.

But, I would take the article a step further & ask you to possibly have a follow piece on the general cost of living in NZ. Maybe a comparison like you had but without exchange rates. (EG: if you earn $50,000 a year in New Zealand dollars, in Australian dollars & in Pounds). I believe that we would see a quite different result than what we’ve seen in this piece tonight.

I’ve been away from NZ now for 10yrs, I am a VERY proud kiwi and take every opportunity I can to tell people the 12hr flight from here in the States is absolutely worth it! All my colleagues & friends are very clear that I’m a Kiwi, not an Aussie – which I get called 9 out of ten times damn it.

I’m also looking at relocating to be closer to home with my family next year, but with the cost of living and salary comparisons to Australia, from research I’ve done, Aussie seems to be the clear winner.

Anyway, thanks again for covering the Herald article, maybe worthwhile having another look though??