Q+A: Shane Taurima Interviews Harawira, Peters and Boscawen
Q+A: Shane Taurima Interviews Hone Harawira, Winston
Peters and John Boscawen
Mana Party Leader
Hone Harawira calls on the Government to delay the asset
sales programme to “show faith in the Waitangi
Tribunal”.
ACT Deputy Leader John Boscawen says
there are “massive advantages to the economy in
privatising these assets”, and thinks the Government
should proceed.
NZ First Leader Winston Peters on
going ahead with asset sales now: “Every economist with
half a brain says it’s a bad idea,” and thinks it should
be set aside.
Peters believes National, United
Future, the Maori Party and ACT are all collapsing on this
issue: “They’re not prepared to put up one person today
to sustain their argument.”
Boscawen: “It is a
good time to sell…. Absolutely conclusively, private
enterprise runs businesses better.”
Hone Harawira
says nearly every one of the Crown witnesses at the Waitangi
Tribunal admitted that Maori had a right to water and that
that right should be clarified before the state assets sales
programme proceeded.
Winston wants the Government
to back off “this silly policy”.
Harawira
doesn’t believe the Maori Party will walk, but says if the
Government proceeds with its asset sales programme, then it
should walk.
Harawira and Boscawen believe the
Government will push ahead tomorrow. Peters doesn’t want
to predict but thinks they should put this silly idea
aside.
Q+A, 9-10am Sundays on TV ONE and
one hour later on TV ONE plus 1.
Thanks
to the support from NZ ON Air.
Q+A is on
Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/NZQandA#!/NZQandA
and on Twitter, http://twitter.com/#!/NZQandA
Q+A
SHANE
TAURIMA INTERVIEWS HONE HARAWIRA, WINSTON PETERS
AND JOHN
BOSCAWEN
GREG
BOYED
Tomorrow, at last, is D-Day for asset
sales. Cabinet meets, and after a week of deliberations on
the Waitangi Tribunal’s contentious water rights report,
we’ll hear what National intends. Will it press ahead, or
hang fire, as the tribunal urged, and negotiate? Can it
somehow do both? And what about the Maori Party? Its leaders
didn’t want to talk ahead of the decision. ACT leader John
Banks and United Future leader Peter Dunne, who both voted
for the sales, declined to appear as well. We still have
three distinct views, though. Mana Party leader Hone
Harawira, NZ First leader Winston Peters and ACT’s deputy
leader and former MP John Boscawen. They’re all with Shane
Taurima.
SHANE
TAURIMA
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us.
Welcome to the programme. Hone Harawira, let’s begin with
you. What do you think the government should
do?
HONE HARAWIRA - Mana Party
Leader
I think it’s important to start it off
with the ruling from the tribunal, which was that the
government would be in breach of the Treaty of Waitangi if
it pushed ahead with this asset sales programme before the
issue of Maori water rights has been settled. I think what
the government should be doing is recognising the importance
of that tribunal ruling. I think the government should give
the tribunal time. They’ve asked for the time, as have the
council, for those rights to be clarified and taken out to
Maoridom so that there’s a proper understanding of what
they should be.
SHANE
So delay their
programme.
HONE
And, I think, at the end of the day, they should,
if they are showing faith in the tribunal and the judicial
process, defer the sales of state assets
programme.
SHANE
John Boscawen, the government, National - this is a
cornerstone policy that we’re talking about. They’d look
weak, though, if they were to delay, wouldn’t
they?
JOHN BOSCAWEN - ACT Party Deputy
Leader
Uh, I don’t believe they would. Having said that, I think
there are irrefutable reasons to support going ahead. I
think there are massive advantages to the economy in
privatising these assets. The evidence has been irrefutable
in all the studies done on partial privatisations and
privatisations. There’s huge benefits to the
economy.
SHANE
So let’s just clarify your position. You’re
saying you wouldn’t mind if they were to hold their
programme.
JOHN
What I’m saying is that there are huge advantages
for proceeding and to partially privatise these assets. One
only has to look at the area of Tauranga Winston used to
represent. Just compare the performance of the Port of
Tauranga against the Ports of Auckland. The Port of
Tauranga’s privatised. Massive improvements in
productivity.
SHANE
So can I please just pinpoint your position. Do you
agree with the tribunal that the government should halt its
sale
programme?
JOHN
We think the government should
proceed.
SHANE
So go ahead. Winston Peters, where does that leave
you? We’ve got one saying halt and negotiate, one saying
proceed, push on.
WINSTON PETERS - NZ First
Leader
Well, first of all, New Zealanders must be alarmed - and I
don’t care where they come from - but they must be alarmed
that such a critical issue as this is not being decided by a
court of law but by something that’s not even a court - a
tribunal. Put that aside. The people say that they’re
opposed, it’s a bad idea. The market, particularly right
now, says it’s a bad idea. Every economist with half a
brain says it’s a bad idea. And, frankly, they should set
it aside, follow the wish of the people and get on with
trying to find alternatives to run the country sustainably
long-term, economically and
soundly.
SHANE
We’re talking about court, Hone Harawira. Won’t
the government need to pull something out of its hat,
otherwise it will be off to
court.
HONE I
think the government should defer the court action by simply
allowing the tribunal the time that it’s asked for to
consider what those rights mean, what the extent of those
rights are, what the role of Maori is in terms of water, in
terms of rights and responsibilities. And the opportunity
for Maori to consider exactly how best to move forward,
rather than try to rush ahead with a deal with two or three
individuals just to sell off Mighty River in opposition to
what the whole of New Zealand
wants.
SHANE
And if it doesn’t do that, it’s off to court,
isn’t it?
HONE
If it doesn’t do that, then I think the Maori
Council is very much within their rights to go to court. I
mean, the tribunal’s ruling is quite clear on
that.
SHANE Mr
Peters, John Key seems to expect court action, and he seems
to be quite relaxed about it. Are you happy for the courts
to make a decision on this issue, to
decide?
WINSTON Well,
it’s only his naivety that would make him relaxed about
it. I mean, this was somebody who promised us the very
reverse of what’s happened. He’s put this issue on the
basis of race before a tribunal, and now we’re going to
have injunctions and on to the high courts of this country.
The very thing he promised not to do. But the reality is
he’s not relaxed, because everything that suggests the
latest market situation in terms of the interests of New
Zealand says he should not be doing what he’s doing.
Forget about what the ACT Party says. They’re so good, the
ACT Party. The Maori Party, the United Future Party and the
National Party - they’re not prepared to put up one person
today to sustain their argument. They’re collapsing on
this issue. And the sooner we get on with running a sound,
prosperous country with sound macro and micro economic
policies, rather than these sort of silver bullets, the
better.
SHANE
Mr Boscawen, is this a good time to sell them? It
looks a bit risky at the moment, especially with the state
of the
markets.
JOHN
Well, I think that just simply highlights the fact
governments are not good owners of business. Winston just
said we need to run a prosperous country. 12 years ago, the
government sold a 40% stake in Contact Energy for $5 a
share. And today it trades at less than $5. It actually
trades at less than what the
government-
WINSTON
It’s the worst performer of them
all.
JOHN
We had Solid Energy announce write-offs of $150
million during the week on the basis of falling coal
prices.
SHANE
So you’re saying it is a good time to
sell?
JOHN
It is a good time to sell. We don’t know what the
future holds. That’s the whole point about private
enterprise. Absolutely conclusively, private enterprise runs
businesses better. As I say, simply compare the Port of
Tauranga - privately listed, on the stock exchange - with
Ports of Auckland, which is run inefficiently and 100%
controlled by the Auckland
Council.
WINSTON Of
those power companies, the worst performer of the last five
years has been Contact. Why would he say that the private
industry’s been able to run it better that the government
industry, which is the very one he wants his mates to get
his hands on?
SHANE
Let’s go back to the point around this being a
good time to sell. If, though, the government doesn’t
defer and it looks like, as Hone predicts, there will be
legal action, that’s going to delay the sale. What is that
going to do?
JOHN
This is a fundamental plank of the government’s
policy. It’s about operating these businesses
efficiently.
SHANE
What will legal action do? Won’t it actually hold
it up, so therefore the follow-up question to that is, does
the government need to
legislate?
JOHN
The government can proceed. The government argued
in front of the Waitangi Tribunal it can proceed. It argued
that if there is determined to be those rights available,
that the government can
proceed.
HONE
I have to cut in
here.
SHANE
Let him
finish.
JOHN
Look, this could take years and years and years to
settle these water rights. The government campaigned on a
policy of opening up these
assets.
SHANE
I’m going to allow Hone to have his
say.
HONE
John wasn’t even at the tribunal hearing. I was,
and I can advise that nearly every one of the Crown
witnesses admitted that Maori had a right to water and that
that right should be clarified before the state assets sales
programme proceeded. In terms of
whether-
JOHN
And that’s
correct.
HONE
Taihoa, John. In terms of whether it’s a good
idea economically, when Gareth Morgan comes on TV and says,
‘I find it difficult to believe that John Key can sell an
asset that he doesn’t have the papers to.’ And that’s
exactly what the tribunal is saying. Those papers are not
John Key’s to sell. On that basis, it should be clarified
before it moves
forward.
SHANE
The point about, though, the government legislating
to say that nobody owns water, because
we-
HONE
That’s two different positions that the Prime
Minister’s taken in the last six weeks. He came out early
to say nobody owns water. He had a private meeting with iwi
leaders and said everybody owns water. Now, the guy’s got
to make his mind up. It’s either there, there or somewhere
in the middle.
SHANE
Can I ask you the same question,
Winston?
WINSTON Mr
Boscawen and everybody out there who wants to defends this -
if, as Mr Key says, no one owns water, then on what basis
does he purport to sell 49% of
it?
JOHN
He’s not.
WINSTON
That’s the first thing. Then when you listen to
this ideological humbug here, the worst performer of these
power companies of which we speak was Contact Energy. The
other ones are performing at
18% plus, debt servicing at
about 5% or 6%. This is gilt-edged security, well managed by
the public. That’s why his mates can’t wait to get their
hands on it.
SHANE
You don’t want it to go to court. Would you
prefer that the government
legislates?
WINSTON No,
I prefer the government back off this silly policy that put
the matter in front of the tribunal in the first place, that
naively went ahead despite all these warnings that they were
given and decides on the economic basis that it’s also an
act of grave national
stupidity.
SHANE
But it doesn’t look like they’re going to do
that, though, does it?
WINSTON
I’m not going to predict what these people do.
All I’m saying is what the outcome’s going to be, and
the outcome will be that this will be a very short-term
measure if they go down that
track.
SHANE
To provide some clarity, to provide some certainty
so the sale could proceed, Mr Boscawen, would you prefer
that the government
legislates?
JOHN
I don’t think that’s necessary at all. In fact,
when the government sought to legislate the Foreshore and
Seabed Act in 2003, the ACT Party strongly opposed
it.
SHANE And
you would oppose the same if they were to take the same
action this time
around?
JOHN
This is not a particular issue that our ACT board
has discussed at this
stage.
SHANE
What’s your personal
feeling?
JOHN
Looking back to 2003, the ACT Party stands for one
law for all. It actually supports property rights, it
supports the right of iwi to go to court, and that was the
reason that we opposed the Foreshore and Seabed Act in 2003.
Coming back to Hone’s point, Hone’s conceded that the
nature of these rights in uncertain. This could take years
and years and years to settle. You’ve just acknowledged
that, which is the reason the government must push on with
the sale. It’s a fundamental
priority-
SHANE
Can we talk about the politics, because as you said
from the outset, the tribunal has said that this would be a
clear treaty breach if the government was to
proceed.
HONE
That’s
right.
SHANE
Therefore, does the Maori Party have any choice but
to walk if the government
proceeds?
HONE
Oh, they’ve done their best to talk tough and not
walk on many previous occasions. They won’t walk this
time. In terms of where the politics are on this issue right
now, ACT has just announced that they won’t support it, NZ
First won’t support it, Mana won’t support it, the
Greens won’t support it, Labour won’t support it. If the
Maori Party doesn’t support it, this deal is dead in the
water.
SHANE
So the Maori Party, you’re saying, it must walk
if the government was to announce tomorrow that it would
proceed.
HONE
As a matter of principle, the Maori Party should
walk. They can’t have the tribunal say that the
government’s proceeding on this would be a breach of the
Treaty of Waitangi. They can’t have that ruling and then
stay with the government if the government chooses to breach
the Treaty of Waitangi. However, I don’t believe that they
well because they’ve never shown a willingness to stand by
principle in the
past.
SHANE
John, can I just confirm, did you just say you
won’t support
this?
JOHN
What I said was that the ACT Party board has not
discussed this issue, but if you look back to 2003, we
strongly opposed government partial legislation and we
supported the right of the Maori claimants to go to court.
We actually supported the right of iwi to go to
court.
SHANE
What happens if the Maori Party walks? Will ACT
stay there to continue to support the
government?
JOHN
The ACT Party is committed to supporting the
government, but let’s just simply say that the Maori Party
have been incredibly successful in what they’ve negotiated
with the National Party in the last four years. They’ve
achieved far more than they achieved under the Labour
Government. Simply just look at the United Nations
Declaration on indigenous people. Helen Clark refused to
ratify that. John Key did.
SHANE Let’s
talk about whether or not a middle road can actually be
achieved here. It doesn’t look like the government’s
going to stop its programme or halt its programme. Is there
any middle road for it?
WINSTON
There’s no middle road. There’s no middle road
for fiscal treachery like this. What do you mean a middle
road? What they’re doing is selling one of the gilt-edged
assets that our grandfathers and forefathers built up, that
is a massive profitable venture that even Treasury, which
hardly is a left-wing outfit, says is fiscally unsound as a
move. And the only pathway for the Maori Party and the
National Party is to come to their senses and put this
matter back where it belongs: with the
people.
HONE
Yep.
SHANE
So what do you expect to be in tomorrow’s
announcement? What is Mr Key going to
say?
HONE
I think, like John Boscawen said, that they are
committed to this because it’s a major plank of their
policy, and they’re going to do whatever it takes to go
ahead with this sale. If that forces them into the courts, I
expect them to legislate in the same way that Labour
legislated over the foreshore and seabed. I would expect as
a matter of principle that the Maori Party walks. They
won’t. I’d be surprised if ACT didn’t oppose the
government on this one. In which case, the whole house of
cards will
collapse.
SHANE
If Hone’s predications are right, Winston, the
coalition could collapse.
WINSTON Well, I don’t
think for a moment the ACT Party’s going to do anything at
all, frankly. The idea that they’ve got principles is so
ridiculous, it’s not even worth discussing. The
reality-
JOHN
Winston, I’d much rather have my reputation than
yours, mate.
WINSTON
With great respect, you’ve got no reputation.
That’s why you’ve gone. That’s why we’re
back.
SHANE So
talking about tomorrow?
WINSTON
Well, let’s get on to it because I thought we
wasted far too much time with a party that’s going to
oblivion. Now, my real point is that tomorrow Mr Key will go
for one further shot at his, I think, exquisite solutions.
But there aren’t any more left. He’s run out of time,
he’s run out of options, he’s run out of answers, and
that’s now very blatantly and glaringly exposed before the
New Zealand people. He should act in the national interest
and put this silly idea
aside.
SHANE
And the last word, please, Mr Boscawen. Your
expectations for
tomorrow.
JOHN
I believe Mr Key will act in the national interest.
The evidence for partial privatisations is overwhelming, and
one only has to compare the performance of the Port of
Tauranga - 10% increase, 10 times increasing profits in the
last 20 years - with the Ports of Auckland controlled by the
Auckland Council. And the government will act in the
interests of all New Zealanders. This is an issue, water
rights, that could take several years to
resolve.
SHANE
And unfortunately we have to leave it there. Thank
you, gentlemen for joining us, and have a happy Father’s
Day.
ENDS