Scott Lynda: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Scott Lynda: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9423] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I draw the Committee’s attention to a survey done by John Bell who is a senior lecturer in marketing at Otago University. It was a survey of the satisfaction of residents with retirement villages. In that survey only 1 percent of retirement village residents were dissatisfied with their retirement village. None were extremely dissatisfied while 34 to 55 percent respectively were satisfied or very satisfied with it and a further 10 percent had no view on the issue. I think that shows us that those people—following on from the last speaker who made a few disparaging comments about living in monocultures—who buy into retirement villages are pretty happy. 
It is a bit of a shame that the ability of retirement villages to offer integrated care has been reduced. As I said before retirement villages in the South Island tend to have rest homes dementia units and continuing care units. I remember that years and years ago my grandmother went into a unit in a retirement village. When she fell and fractured her hip she went into the rest home and then when she had a series of strokes at the age of 95 she went into the continuing care unit. The integrated care model allowed her to stay in a place she was familiar with and with staff she was familiar with and to stay within the whole concept of that home. That type of care has been reducing because under this Government rest homes and continuing care units have had their prices held for nearly 5 years. It has become much less viable to deliver those services so a great number of retirement villages are no longer following an integrated care model. That is a shame especially when we continually hear Ruth Dyson talk about integrated care. That system was being delivered and had been delivered for a long time in New Zealand. It is a shame to see it reducing. 
I believe that this bill will make it more difficult to develop and buy into retirement villages. The cost—and we have heard from the ACT party about the financial implications—means that there is likely to be some limitation now on the sale development and expansion of retirement villages. I guess that is a price to pay for ensuring that residents have protection and understand what they are buying into and for that protection to come under one piece of legislation. 
Grey Power wanted the Retirement Commissioner to appoint the statutory supervisors who will act under the legislation but I was pleased that was not taken up because it is the owners and operators who will have to pay for those services. It is appropriate that statutory supervisors work in the type of situation where they are responsible for residents and for handling disputes but also have an obligation as well to the operator of the village to maintain the village and ensure it can continue as a whole. I think that for most people who came to the Justice and Electoral Committee it is a balancing act between the concerns of residents that we heard about from Grey Power and those that we heard about from people in the retirement villages industry. 
The Minister mentioned the disclosure document which will make it very clear what someone is buying into. I do not think that issue has had any effect. People are happy with their villages and they know what they are buying into. As I said before certainly in the North Island there are waiting lists to buy units at many of the villages at this time. People have not been concerned about having knowledge about what they are buying into and about the financial implications if they leave early—within the first 4 years when there are quite high depreciation costs. What often happens is that elderly people have a lot of equity in their homes. They may not have a lot of cash but they have a lot of equity in their homes. If they can sell a large home and buy into a village it frees up capital for them to buy a new car travel or go overseas. At times when they buy into a village the price they would pay for a 2-bedroom unit would be less than they would pay for a similar stand-alone unit down the road. That frees up some capital for them so the quid pro quo is being able to free up that capital.