Member log in

Privatisation goes into panic mode

Management of the government’s signature second-term policy of partial privatisation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) staggers on from disastrous to catastrophic by the week.

The government seems to have suffered a crisis of confidence over the proposed SOE selldowns after assuming that its strong showing in the general election was an affirming referendum on its promises.

Nowadays the government seems unsure about how much money it will raise from selling off chunks of four electricity generators and Air New Zealand; what percentage of equity it will sell in each of these businesses; whether these percentages will be sold in single or multiple tranches; and, in the case of Air New Zealand, when it will go to the market.

All of this wobbling is occurring over what before the election was well advertised in advance by Prime Minister John Key as a straightforward, plain-vanilla sale of 49% of the SOEs’ equity to private sector shareholders with the Crown retaining 51% and effective control.

The fly-in-the-ointment has turned out to be s9 of the State-owned Enterprises Act 1986, which reads, “Nothing in this Act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.”

The Maori Party apparently missed the significance of this section when it signed up for another round of the baubles of office with the National-led government after the last election. But the wonder is how National itself failed to spot the issue in advance.

Possibly only Official Information Act requests will prise out the truth concerning what sort of advice and information the government received before and after the election that might have contained a warning about the SOE Act.

It certainly sounds like somebody who should have known better needs to be sacked, perhaps starting with Treaty lawyer, Attorney-General and Minister of Treaty Negotiations Christopher Finlayson, who has surely dropped his colleagues right into the proverbial whare paku’s cesspit over the contentious issue.

In any event, now that the matter is out in the open, and baying Maori tribal interests smell blood, it appears the government is in a panic about its partial privatisation policy, which was really a variant of the much-vaunted public private partnerships (PPPs) it has been eager to forge with the private sector in order to improve the governance of Crown assets.

The problem now confronting the government is that its SOE assets for sale look tainted by the Treaty association.

Mr Key has stated that private sector investors cannot be bound by a s9 type of legislative stipulation. But Maori tribal lobbyists are nonetheless keen to see the Crown remain constrained in such a manner as a shareholder in a partially-privatised SOE.

Binding the Crown
Given that Mr Key has yet again confirmed that the Crown’s minimum shareholding in the SOEs in question will remain at 51% but could in practice be higher, then it follows that a s9 type of constraint would bind the Crown as majority shareholder and influence its voting.

If maintaining consistency with the Treaty’s alleged principles ran counter to the interests of the minority shareholders, then too bad for them, because they couldn’t out-vote a Crown majority shareholder under diktat of those principles and would be trumped every time.

Further complications arise in that a s9 constraint on the Crown would create two kinds of private sector shareholders: Maori tribal interests and the rest.

It’s a one-way bet that Maori tribal interests would be extremely vigilant and litigious concerning the Crown’s adherence as majority shareholder to a s9-type constraint, and that they would invariably interpret the principles of the Treaty in their own favour.

Off to court or the Waitangi Tribunal these Maori tribal interests would rush every time they felt that the Crown was acting or potentially about to act inconsistently with Treaty principles and the devil take the other non-Maori private shareholders.

Ironically, by Mr Key’s own reading of the situation, Maori tribal interests as private investors would be free to act inconsistently with Treaty principles, which would very much suit a sector of our society that increasingly acts as a law unto itself anyway and sees the Treaty only in one-sided terms of how much compensation and appeasement the Crown owes perpetually aggrieved Maori.

A dog that hasn’t barked yet is the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP), which at the height of his smile-and-wave imperium Mr Key recklessly permitted Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples sign the Crown up to, laughing off the event as insignificant.

DRIP affords Maori tribal interests another, extraterritorial avenue through the United Nations to seek Treaty compliance by the Crown as a majority-stake SOE shareholder, not to mention preferential race-based allocations of SOE shares and public funding for their purchase.

Comments and questions
43

Excellent article, it is disturbing when the financial governance of a nation is taken out of the hands of the democratically elected Government by a minority lobby group.
It will show us how much leadership Mr Key has, that's for sure.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 7:25am

.. or when Auckland rate payer funded business such as PoAL is held hostage to illogical ideals by a few disenfranchised, militant unionists - holding the business's of wider Auckland to ransom whilst they demand unrealistic terms - whilst at the same time inflicting deliberate business sabotage to the tune of $25Million so far...

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 7:25am

You mean the Federated Farmers lobby group?

You mean 'the Business' lobby group?

You mean the 'Trans-national Corporates' lobby group?

You mean the 'Cigarettes' lobby group?

You mean the 'Foreign Investors' lobby group?

It's not like lobbying and lobby groups aren't a part of politics. At least the iwi lobby groups have the REAL social, environmental, cultural, spiritual and economic interests of everyone at heart. Yes - everyone. Protecting this country's environment and sustainable wealth-generation potential benefits EVERYONE. You can't say that of the other lobbyists.

However and whatever the mechanism - its just wonderful to see this government's plans to sell off our assets blowing up in its face!

Take the hard decisions National - if you want to get back into budget surplus then dont sell the family silver - cut WFF, cut interest free student loans and extend the age at which superan. can be claimed.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 8:21am

The socialists lost the election! Remember!!
National campaigned on getting Gov. out of what can be better delivered by the private sector.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 8:21am

....Or perhaps in the short term just replace the top tax rate (which by removing National was being deliberately and fiscally irresponsible!) and in the long term introduce a tax-free threshold so everyone benefits from a 'Tax Cut' on a more equal footing.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 6:03pm

National did "replace the top tax rate", to where it had been since the mid-1980s, until after Cullen and Clark increased it from 33% to 39% in 2000 for no good reason ("we won, you lost, eat that"), and then proceeded on the greatest socialist spend up in decades.

"Maori signing up to baubles", Mr Coote?
Would that be before or after the Treaty exactly?

Perhaps one might suggest that you adopt a little decorum of respect towards the natives when referring to them, especially now in the 21st century, wouldn't you say?

Past time for Key & co to stop focusing solely on the next election and produce a medium term plan for the country.
Peter Martin

The hardest decision will be the last one : when the 90% (whities) of NZ stand united and vote for Republicanism of Aotearoa = finality to the PAM [ pereniall grieving maori ]

It is time to face the fact that the experiment with Nationhood of a group of 4.5 million people in the South Pacific is over, and it is a failure! The examples are legion - a country of under 5 million with more diplomats and places to hide them than India! Far less people producing goods for sale than those on benefits. Taxes (total) taxes at stifling rates, and the most useless political system in the world. Time to take a couple of asprin and go to Aussie - but guess what?

Deep down the majority do not want our assets sold.
Most agree it is a quick fix that will quickly be overtaken by what is a long term problem.
Maori is playing games to hold back the process.
Will they hold it up long enough for it to be put in the too hard basket? Time will tell...

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 10:09am

You are bang on, Anon.

All the proceeds from sale of Telecom, BNZ, TranzRail, Petrocorp, Air NZ (1), Auckland Airport, Contact Energy, Government Print, Postbank, Shipping Corp, State Insurance, THC etc - $18.9 billion worth - have been squandered by the government on paying for groceries.

If the government kept Telecom, instead of selling it to the Americans and Fay Richwhite and gang, NZ would have been better off - in $ terms, by $14 billion in increased value (realized by the Americans in dividends and capital returns) and we would have the fastest and best broadband in the world.

LEARN from history, Mr Key and COME out with something that will fix NZ's economic fortunes.

NO MORE ASSET SALES!

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 10:09am

The natives were never playing the games, they fell for the game and started playing, that's the very reason for native representation within Whare Paremata. This could've been sorted out a very, very long time ago if the want and the desire was there from the other Treaty partner, but no, a lot of to-ing and fro-ing 170+ years down the track and we are have an opportunity to sort it out once and for all, that's the desire e hoa..... Furthermore, the author notes an accurate assessment of all Government Minister's who missed the significance of Section 9, the ball is now in their Court, the natives have spoken.....

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 10:09am

The Government has given a firm assurance that "our assets" won't be sold. Some shares will be sold, with the proceeds invested in other securities.

The net tangible assets line is unaffected. The portfolio is slightly diversified.

Why the hysteria?

If this Government really wanted to save billion$ of taxpayer monies - all it needs to do is to CUT OUT THE CONTRACTORS and CONSULTANTS? How much extra money has it cost NZ taxpayers and ratepayers by replacing the BUREAUCRACY with the CONTRACTOCRACY?

Also - how much of the current $13 BILLION health budget could be saved by focussing on the WELLNESS - rather than SICKNESS model?

Of course there would be no major 'conflicts of interest' that would prevent this happening?

Penny Bright

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 12:33pm

Penny, not sure you are up with play however, the government is trying to cut out the consultants and contractors. They were taken on in the 9 years the previous whack-bars were in office. But, well pointed out though Penny.

I applaud those who say "no more asset sales" but they fail to come up with an alternative. When a person, an SME, a larger corporation or a Country, borrow more and more to pay for either consumption or non productive assets eventually the piper must be paid.

Simple maths, decide how much of the Governments tax take is to be spent on interest payments, and anything above that has to come from cutting costs or selling stuff.

The concept that the Government will always provide for everyones needs is flawed.

We have become a paradise in the south pacific with a very significant portion of the population relying on an ever decreasing population that work and generate taxes to fund their lifestyle choice. Well eventually when those relying on transfer payments make demands that are too costly to bear, we the income earners and profit generators will find some where else to invest our capital (whether it be $s or brain power)

Key may have to limit his SOE IPOs to smaller tranches over a two year period.

And totally agree that the PoA have to deal swiftly to the workers, in fact they are not workers they are lifestylers who do not understand that the days of work to rule no longer apply. If you choose not to avail your self of the fine education available in NZ and then work shifting boxes around on a warf your choices are limited. The trojan horse offer to accept a smaller pay rise is not going to work, its not the pay rate that is the issue, its what you the warfies do (and achieve) with your time when you are at work that is critical.

In response to Chris . | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 12:41pm

Hi chris.
You make a fair point.
One way to solve the government's interest payment bills is to create our own debt free money.
Currently, 2% of our money is debt free, that's the coin and paper money in circulation.
The rest is borrowed from banks, the banks create the money by typing numbers into a computer and transferring the credit to us, then they chanrge interest.
If the rbnz can create debt free paper money, they can create debt free digital money.
Do that and there is no interest to be paid.
Trouble is, the banks have us over a barrel...
Just look at Greece to see what happens when a country kicks back.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 1:01pm

Don't take this personally but I am heartened by the fact that you are not running the reserve bank of nz.

If our bank was stupid enough to do what you have suggested, print extra $nz, the worth of our existing currency will drop. The same physical amount of assets in NZ Inc exist, but we now have a whole load more $s floating around.

Sorry, no good. We need to work harder, smarter, consume less than we earn, get transfer payments down, get people who are receiving transfer payments to change to the other side of the ledger (ie working doing something of value for

It is not rocket science, earn $1 spend $1.01 and live enetually becomes misery, earn $1 and spend $0,99 and life is bliss.

In response to Chris . | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 1:31pm

Don't buy into the "work hard and you will be rewarded" ideology. The reserve banking system is a fraud. Run by private international bankers this system is designed to enrich those oligarchs and their corporations. There is no mandate for private control of our money supply and it is the underlying cancer of the entire world economy.

In response to Chris . | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 12:41pm

I have an alternative for you. First we fire all members of parliament for incompetence and conflicts of interest. Then stop paying fraudulent overseas banks interest on money that they created out of nothing. Then take back the reserve bank from private interests. Print our own interest free currency. Strongly regulate the banking and finance industry to ensure the ongoing theft of NZ's capital is halted immediately.

Declare NZ an independent soverign country and stop taking orders from Britian and America. Refuse to pay membership to international organizations such as the UN. Immediately withdraw from Free Trade Agreements that do not serve the NZ people. Confiscate and reappropriate assets owned by foreign private corporations who are known financial oligarchs and who were sold NZ's assets fraudulently.

That will do for a start. Iceland has come back from the brink of complete collapse by taking back its economy from the globalists. NZ should never be bought and sold, it is not ours to sell, it belongs to our children and their posterity. Anyone who thinks selling our country is a good idea should be ashamed of themselves. Look at how Greece is being treated. Do you want that for us? Austerity and debt slavery? That is the most likely outcome from selling state assets, based on history, just ask the British people, who allowed their government to sell and privatize almost everything.

We have been sold a lie that globalization and privatization will lead to prosperity. It simply is not true. That path leads to centralized power and wealth and the dark road towards corporatism aka. fascism

Totally agree Anonymous take back what is ours for the future of our children.

I am amazed that Chris believes that credit (money) that was created by our own reserve bank would cause our economy to run out of control. Doesn't he understand that the present banks in New Zealand create credit out of thin air, at the press of a computer key, and put it into circulation as a loan, that then must have interest paid on it! They must then create credit for new loans, if the existing loan is ever to be paid back. Go figure!! The present government gave the corporations that operate in New Zealand a ten percent tax reduction. Most of these companies are overseas owned. Through imputation credits, if the previous tax regime had remained in place, New Zealand shareholders could have then had their tax commitments balanced out after they received their dividends. If these overseas companies didn't like it, they didn't have to buy the companies. One of the many reasons this gvernment is in such a financial bind is that under the present laize faire policies, most of our productive industry has been bought up by overseas companies, which, if the production hasn't been moved overseas, have certainly taken all the profits there. We are now seeing the same sell off of our productive farming land, therefore the tax base will shrink even further. Also the workers on these corporate farms will not make the same income as one ownig it, and the tax base will be even further reduced.

It's very disapponiting to see the number of pure racists on this. Having held out some hope that this country might have turned a corner I still see the white european supremicists abound. Oh yes before you all start biting I am Māori and Irish Catholic and if you want to get into class politics I have been on both sides of the fence as a unionist and as a business owner. It seems to me that the CEO of PoAL is doing a real good job of gutting that company and driving it into the ground. The Treaty of Waitangi is the document that defined this country and it is about time that Pākehā NZ realised that because a treaty works both ways not just one way as it has done for 170 years.

Seems to me all the CEO massive salary increases are the core of our societys problems and with termination payouts they are bleeding this country.

In response to Anonymous | Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 7:57pm

I totally agree, over sized reenumeration's for little output. Salary's to match a PM is out of line in NZ, we are not a large country with much wealth.

How much do these assets earn, what is the cost of borrowing, and which is greater? Has this ever been clarified? The government got less than half of the vote from two thirds of voters. If support of less than 33% is considered 'A MANDATE' then consider what a 49% share holding could do in a company.

Asset sales make NZ poorer, not richer. Scrap the tax cuts.. they're the only thing that's affordable.

Other deficit is largely just cyclical, National'd rationale for sales is entirely false & does not serve NZ's interests.

(Unaffordable.) Sorry, fighting my phone's auto-correct!

Selling something that makes billions in profit is stupid.

so much heated anger.
I do agree fabricate ing money to charge interest on money that doesn't excist is going to cause a compound ing problem of debt. which is how most property around the world has been stolen into the hands of a few.
we can't afford to just brush the rest of the world aside to fix the problem of today. we just need to educate the country out of excess consumerism as someone mentioned earlier that all it takes is to spend slightly less than earnt rather than purchase everything with borrowed money that costs future money

Can we avoid the dogma, and sell, or not sell, for the RIGHT reasons?

Not simply because it's National Party dogma to sell (or embarrasment that they feel they have to do what they said they'd do) or Labour party dogma not to sell.

Most 'arguments' I've heard - on both sides of the so-called debate - are mere slogans, representing deeply held dogma, bereft of economic analysis.

Simple question: Is the taxpayer better off by selling (reducing debt costs) or by holding (retaining dividend income)?

Wouldn't it be great if politicians were brave enough to make decisions based on what's actually best for the country...

They could just abide by the wishes of the electorate and give up this unwise venture.

Why would you sell a asset returning 10% plus to pay down 6% interest?

In response to Anonymous | Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 8:10am

Because there is millions to be made for John keys old lynch mob mates.

I really wish someone (with the capacity to organize it) could start a petition to get a 'citizens initiated referendum' on this issue of asset sales - this would then show Mr. Key just how little of a mandate he actually has! I looked into it but you need $500 to even get started. Wording that comes to mind could be along the lines of "Since New Zealand's assets are owned by the people of New Zealand and the government of the day is only the caretaker, the government shall be required to obtain permission to sell our assets by means of a two thirds majority in a national referendum". - Bryce Stenberg.

In response to Anonymous | Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 11:12am

Hey Bryce, i'll put a dollar towards getting that going, and i'm pretty sure there will be more people willing to do the same... facebook my friend... i'll keep an eye out. - Stacey

The sooner we become a Republic the better.

In response to Geoffrey McRae | Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 11:14am

Because America's doing so much better???

As one of the older generation who created these assets in the first place in a country with genuine and good people in govt i can,t help thinking that you all do a lot of gassing and nothing constuctive. god help my great grandchildren//

Native peoples? Indigenous Maoris?
What a load of cobblers.

The Maoris were immigrants just like the rest of the Kiwi Iwi. They came for the Pacific Islands and enslaved slaughtered and ate the indigenous Morioris .
Those who wish to regress to that tribal constant warfare and stone age behaviour has better pack up and go back to the islands they came from.
This is 2012 and we certainly dont want a Wall street spiv like John Key or crackpot Marxist Jews like Cunliffe and Shearer to bring their divisive and sleazy commercial practices to New Zealand and to turn us into a failed Democracy like America.

Already we see Gestapo copycat police replacing our once friendly and respected local coppers, If we allow these troublemakers any more political influence how long will it be before we are all impoverished and spy drones spy on us from our once friendly skies just as they do in the Jew role model America.

Yankee Jew whipped butt kissers go home.

Native peoples? Indigenous Maoris?
What a load of cobblers.

The Maoris were immigrants just like the rest of the Kiwi Iwi. They came for the Pacific Islands and enslaved slaughtered and ate the indigenous Morioris .
Those who wish to regress to that tribal constant warfare and stone age behaviour has better pack up and go back to the islands they came from.
This is 2012 and we certainly dont want a Wall street spiv like John Key or crackpot Marxist Jews like Cunliffe and Shearer to bring their divisive and sleazy commercial practices to New Zealand and to turn us into a failed Democracy like America.

Already we see Gestapo copycat police replacing our once friendly and respected local coppers, If we allow these troublemakers any more political influence how long will it be before we are all impoverished and spy drones spy on us from our once friendly skies just as they do in the Jew role model America.?

Yankee Jew whipped butt kissers go home.

The reality here is that government has no option but to abide by the conditions of it's agreement with the international monerty fund whom have been binding the nz government since the sixties with it's financial loan packages. Conditions are sale of state assets, Reduction of national diverged and free trade agreements

Post new comment or question

Full HTML is not supported but you can use the following tags in your comments:
Link: <url>link</url>
Quote: <quote>text</quote>