Parliament

Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | Video | Questions Of the Day | Search

 

Why No Answers Before Decisions?

Monday, September 10 2001

ACT Commerce Spokesman Stephen Franks said today New Zealand taxpayers, New Zealand air travellers, Air New Zealand staff and Air New Zealand shareholders deserve answers to the questions ACT has been putting on their behalf before the government panics into a decision at last on Air New Zealand.

"No package promoted by the Board, which leaves in place BIL as a shareholder, should be approved until we know whether BIL has been the block on sensible earlier decisions.

"Has BIL blocked a cash issue because it didn't want to put in any more money but didn't want to lose what it thought was strategic negotiating advantage with Singapore Airlines?

"Has BIL been illegally wielding control influence? If so, why has it not been ejected from the share register?

"Does the "letter of comfort" or other guarantee arrangements for Ansett mean that fresh New Zealand money is just throwing good money after bad?

"What Board changes will be made given the total lack of confidence the market must now have in the current management?

"Why are the other questions I have been asking still unanswered?" Stephen Franks said.

ENDS

ATTACHED: LETTER TO MICHAEL CULLEN SENT ON FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 7.

07 September 2001

Hon Dr Michael Cullen
Minister of Finance
Parliament Buildings
WELLINGTON

Air New Zealand

I recognise that it is not always possible to deal with developing commercial matters openly.

I understand the pressures that will be facing you and your colleagues.

Nevertheless, I believe the months of government indecision over the possibility of a government bail out may have prolonged Air New Zealand's crisis. Judging from my past experience it could have let a shell shocked board clutch at the straw of eventual government rescue, to postpone taking sensible immediate action. Your replies early this week to my Parliamentary Questions concluded by saying, in effect, you did not propose to answer them.

Government members are happy to spend Parliamentary time asking yourselves and replying to patsy questions about pork barrel grants of trifling proportions, and negligible policy significance. Yet there have been no substantive responses to questions on a matter that could be bigger than any of the other business subsidy 'initiatives'.

Please provide answers to the following questions:

Will fresh money allow BIL to postpone the write off of its investment in a company it has managed to its knees?

Will the money be simply siphoned off to Australia to prop up Ansett?

If it is to prop up Ansett what assurance is there that it will not merely prolong loss leading competition to the benefit only of Australian passengers?

Why should the government create any risk by relaxing the foreign ownership condition if the money raised simply goes to Australia?

How do we know Ansett is salvageable under New Zealand management? This is not to denigrate Air New Zealand managers, but belligerent unions and colluding Australian politicians have driven out ambitious foreigners before now.

Will New Zealand management be allowed to reform Ansett work practices without creating an anti-foreigner backlash? Will Australian authorities suspend flying again, and give Ansett a dodgy reputation?

Was it dishonesty or just incompetence that seems to have left the Air New Zealand representatives on the Ansett board not knowing the true state of the business?

What assurance is there that anything will change?

Can Air New Zealand simply walk away from Ansett if necessary?

Has Air New Zealand guaranteed Ansett's debt?

Is any guarantee limited in time or amount or purpose?

Is any guarantee secured giving Australian creditors claims over Air New Zealand's essential New Zealand operating equipment?

If Air New Zealand has guaranteed Ansett debt, why?

What market research or other comfort have we that Australians will fly with an Ansett closely identified with New Zealand?

Do we know whether New Zealander's patriotic adverse reaction to the rebadging of Ansett New Zealand as "Qantas New Zealand" had anything to do with its low loadings, and if so why would Australians not treat Ansett Australia under New Zealand management the same or worse?

Has the Air New Zealand board and management been blocked from acting promptly by government dithering, or unlawful foreign control, pursuing a wider strategy aimed more at eventually inheriting Australian assets, than in New Zealand's interests?

If it was the latter, why were the government's Kiwi Share powers not used to kick out the shareholders exercising that influence?

I believe the position I have been raising in relation to Air New Zealand for months has been vindicated by events. I hope you have been driven to the conclusion that government should not step in while the effect would be to throw good money after bad. Can we help you make that absolutely clear to Brierley Investments, Singapore Airlines and the Air New Zealand Board?

Stephen Franks MP

ACT New Zealand


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

UK Cabinet Backs Deal: Gordon Campbell On The Latest Roll Of The Brexit Dice

Brexit has left the British public looking like a nation of Wellington bus commuters. In both cases, the unholy mess bears no resemblance to what people were promised or the spin being used to justify it.

In both cases, the only sane response – to go back to the way things were and write the whole thing off as a ghastly mistake – is deemed to be utterly out of the question. More>>

 
 

14/11: Two Years’ Progress Since The Kaikoura Earthquake

Mayor John Leggett said it was a day for reflection, but also a time to recognise the work by many people to support progress towards recovery made across Marlborough since November 2016. More>>

ALSO:

Pike River: Mine Drift Re-Entry Plan To Proceed

“I’ve decided the Te Kāhui Whakamana Rua Tekau Mā Iwa - Pike River Recovery Agency, recommended course of action to enter the drift, using the existing access tunnel, is by far the safest option,” said Andrew Little. More>>

ALSO:

Appointments: New High Commissioner To Australia Announced

“Dame Annette King needs no introduction given her long running career as a parliamentarian where she has previously held a number senior Cabinet portfolios, including Justice, Police and Health. She also was Parliament’s longest serving female MP with 30 years’ service,” said Mr Peters. More>>

ALSO:

Two Years Since Kaikoura: Silvia Cartwright To Lead Inquiry Into EQC

“The inquiry will be the first of its kind under the Public Inquiries Act 2013 and will have all the powers of a Royal Commission, be independent of Government and make its report directly to the Governor-General. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On The Royal Commission Into Child Abuse

Obviously, it is good news that the coalition government has broadened the scope of its Royal Commission into the abuse of children, beyond its previous focus on children in state care. More>>

ALSO:

Cases Delayed: Court Staff Refuse To Handle Sentencing Papers

Dozens of court cases have reportedly been delayed, as court staff escalate industrial action at two Auckland courts by enforcing a ban on handling sentencing papers. More>>

ALSO:

Education: Primary Teachers Rolling Strikes

RNZ Report: More than 100,000 primary school students in Auckland will be home from school today as teachers and principals walk off the job for the second time this year. It's the start of a week of rolling one-day strikes around the country, after the collapse of contract negotiations last Thursday. More>>

ALSO:

"Process Was Sound": Inquiry Into Haumaha Appointment Released

The Inquiry’s purpose was to examine, identify, and report on the adequacy of the process that led to the appointment. It found the process was sound and no available relevant information was omitted. More>>

ALSO:

 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

InfoPages News Channels