Cullen Answering Questions Today On Air NZ
Michael Cullen Answering Questions In The House Today On Air New Zealand.
Belinda Vernon [National - Opposition]
Is the Government considering underwriting or investing
in Air New Zealand, rather than allowing commercial
interests to invest in the company; if so, why?
Michael
Cullen
The Government has made no decisions with respect
to Air New Zealand and won't be in a position to do so until
the company is clear about its business plan for future
operations and the nature of its recapitalisation
requirements.
Belinda
In light of Air New Zealand's
deferring release of its financial report from 4 September
to 13 September, what assurance can he give that the
government will make a decision this Monday and not
procrastinate further on a decision that has already taken
too long?
Michael Cullen
The Member should not
believe everything she reads in the New Zealand Herald or
the Dominion. The fact that Air New Zealand of its own
volition has delayed its financial statements to the 13 of
September should suggest to the member that the government
is not responsible in any way for the delay.
Phillida
Bunkle [Government]
Has the government delayed the
process for making final decisions on Air New Zealand's
future?
Michael Cullen
No. I repeat and this needs
to be clearly understood, the timetable against which
decisions are being made is essentially dictated by Air New
Zealand and to a less extent Singapore. The government will
need to integrate the exercise of its responsibilities with
Air New Zealand's decision processes but this has not
delayed matters.
Steven Franks [ACT – Opposition]
Why
did the government not tell Brierley, now an Asian company,
many months ago that it must sell to genuine New Zealanders
the shares it holds that only New Zealanders can own instead
of toiling to rescue Brierley from a disastrous Ansett
purchase decision.
Michael Cullen
The member again
misunderstands matters. Whether or not Brierley sells its
shares has nothing to do with Air New Zealand's requirements
for recapitalisation. Selling shares in no way
recapitalises a company.
Rod Donald [Greens – neutral]
If it's good enough for the Singapore government through
its controlling stake in Singapore Air to own a stake in Air
New Zealand, why is it not good enough for the New Zealand
government to do the same?
Michael Cullen
I have some
difficulty in answering that question in a way that would be
consistent with the public interest, I simply say to the
member that he and every other member on the opposite side
and almost every member on this side of the house, cannot
know what the sums of money involved are.
Winston Peters
(NZ First - neutral)
Is it the government's view that
the sale to Brierley in 1989 was a decision that was
correct, based on the premise that only a private business
can run an airline, something that the Singapore government
has yet to learn, and if not why would Cabinet even consider
an increase in a foreign control option.
Michael Cullen
The overriding interest that the government has in this
matter is to ensure the survival of Air New Zealand as a
strong and viable airline, one that can promote the Air New
Zealand brand, hopefully also providing a frame work within
which competition can occur both domestically and
internationally and where New Zealand's international
carrier rights are preserved.
Belinda Vernon
In light
of the highly volatile nature of the capital intensive and
globalising aviation market, what assurances can he give
that the government will not risk New Zealand taxpayers'
dollars in Air New Zealand particularly when commercial
investors are keen to invest.
Michael Cullen
Again I
have difficulty in answering in a way that would be
consistent with the public interest. But let me repeat what
the Prime Minister said on Monday. It is certainly not our
preference to be involved in terms of investment within Air
New
Zealand.