Some 750,000 Israelis have left this country since its establishment. Not all these emigrants (yordim in local parlance) are still alive and not all were fully-fledged Israelis. Some briefly sojourned here en route to more permanent destinations. Yet many Israelis resident overseas are among the country's most upwardly-mobile and talented native sons and daughters. They comprise what is popularly dubbed the "brain-drain." It's only natural to wish to draw them back. For the past year - since November 2007 - a campaign headlined "Returning Home on Israel's 60th Birthday" has been under way. Incorporated in it is a plethora of ostensible benefits geared to tug Israelis abroad homeward.

Over 4,000 Israelis responded to the campaign and have resettled here already during its first nine months. This is nearly a 50% increase over the previous year and 22% of that period's overall aliya. Normally the annual total of returnees is 4,500.

This certainly is cause for gratification, but what sort of welcome do repatriates find here? Mostly they encounter two bureaucracies. The Absorption Ministry helps in employment for a period of between 12-24 months, depending on the profession. And the Customs Authority allows various import exclusions for nine months.

BUT THE National Insurance Institute spreads no welcome mat. Israelis (as well as former Israelis who had relinquished their residency status) living abroad for a protracted period during which they hadn't paid health insurance fees must wait two months for each year spent away before they may avail themselves of health services at any sick fund. Paying back all debts doesn't restore eligibility. The minimum waiting period is four months and the maximum is 18. A NIS 8,800 pay-off can shrink the wait to six months.

Several days ago the NII crowed about a new bonus offered returnees: For anyone landing after November 1, 2008 the NIS 8,800 fee will eliminate the waiting period altogether. The maximum wait for all others will be trimmed to six months.

This is admittedly a step in the right direction, but insufficient and doesn't affect those who arrived pre-November 1.

This entire red-tape snarl is superfluous and born of suspicions that former Israelis will rediscover the old country when in dire need of expensive medical care, and will come here, exploit the system underpinned by our NII contributions and then leave again.

It's unconscionable, however, to punish bona fide returnees for the suspected scams of a few. There must be other ways of homing in on likely abusers of our health services. Demanding lump-sum guarantees from those, who without setting up domicile here, request costly surgery and other "big-ticket" treatments isn't untoward, providing they'd be reimbursed in the event they do start remitting regular NII and health fund fees, which indicate residency.

But denying routine care to parents of tots, who may have caught colds or scraped knees, is hardhearted. It's unlikely that anyone seeks to con the NII for a toddler's sore throat. Moreover, insisting on compensation for the lapse in health insurance payments from folks who haven't lived locally for many years is bureaucracy at its worst. The insurance limbo is cited by most Israelis who resettle here as their greatest initial hardship, something which particularly mars the experience of young families with children.

It would be best if our powers-that-be keep in mind the contribution made by the returnees. In 2007 alone, Israelis who had relocated here since 2000 added a whopping NIS 2 billion to our GNP. Their income and productivity are such that within 8-30 months they pay back in income tax well in excess of whatever perks the state offered them. Small-mindedness makes the entire bring-them-home policy incoherent.

If the national objective is to attract Israelis back, then all quibbling and petty bookkeeping is counterproductive and niggling. Precisely such officious attitudes had driven many away in the first place. We aren't talking about young backpackers, drifters or students who were abroad for relatively short periods and should have kept up their NII payments. Penalties against long-absent Israelis, whose homecoming our society desires, foolishly defeat our collective purpose.

We urge NII's new director-general, Esther Dominissini, to examine this issue to see if there is a better way.