In the brief bout of navel-gazing that followed Labour’s trouncing in the general election, some commentators noted how it had pinned its hopes on the no-asset-sales policy rather than suitability to lead the country.

It was observed the policy was a no-brainer if the question was asked: Are you in favour of selling? But when faced with making an intelligent vote about the country’s future, the question was ignored.

That’s because most voters realised it was essentially emotive and would make no difference to people’s lives.

A major bogey in that spurious debate was that “family silver” would end up in foreign hands, when most people do not worry or complain about the degree to which any goods or services are provided by either local owners or overseas ones.

Many, we suspect, would probably be hard pushed to identify such companies as Fletcher Building or Telecom as technically foreign when the vast majority of the shareholder numbers are New Zealanders.

The government will press on with the partial selldown of state-owned power companies and, over time, this will be praised as a valuable benefit to the millions who have joined KiwiSaver.

In fact, Tower Investments chief executive Sam Stubbs says, it is likely KiwiSaver will result in more, not less, local ownership of blue chip companies on the stock exchange.

For a start, the share prices will likely rise as more New Zealanders realise the benefits of owning a stake in local companies, while the higher cost will deter overseas investors interested in bargains.

Labour’s muddle on the foreign ownership is disappointing, as its new leader, David Shearer, is a man with global experience. One of his predecessors, Helen Clark, has in turn become a globalist with her role at the UN.

Globalism is about the free movement of capital and labour; progressive parties do not need populist, nationalist or xenophobic policies that have done so much damage in the past.

Mr Shearer has declared, ahead of any Overseas Investment Office or government decision, the sale of 16 Crafar dairy farms to Chinese company Shanghai Pengxin would “not add value to New Zealand.”

He does not provide any evidence for this but adds, “It asks a fundamental question about who owns New Zealand.”

The sale of a relatively small number of dairy farms does nothing of the sort. Dairying is an important global business in which New Zealand plays a major role. Land ownership is the least of that contribution; it is expertise in farming, processing and marketing that creates the wealth.

Just as opportunistic as Mr Shearer’s intervention is the local consortium that wants to buy the farms but at a lower price than Shanghai Pengxin is offering.

Sir Michael Fay and his supporting iwi backers have every right to make a bid. But their legal action to gain access to any OIO recommendation before a ministerial decision is pre-emptive in the extreme.

It seems aimed at snookering the accepted bid and buying the land at a lower price by playing on emotional fears mentioned above. This has no place in New Zealand business.

The OIO regime, though abused by politicians in the past, is robust enough to have eliminated on character grounds another Chinese-backed bid.

Nothing has suggested Shanghai Pengxin is disreputable or that the OIO can be faulted for approving recent agribusiness purchases by other Chinese companies, including Bright Foods and the Agria-New Hope consortium.

This is not to say legitimate concerns should not been raised about Chinese companies, particularly as most are linked directly or indirectly to the government and the communist party. But these are best decided on facts rather than emotion.