Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Shearer David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 17 July 2012. Volume:681;Page:3532. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
2. 
DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he agree with his Minister of Finance that “the mixed ownership programme will be good for Kiwi investors the Government and the economy as a whole”? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. The mixed-ownership programme is good for New Zealand savers because it opens up a whole new opportunity to invest in large local companies. It is good for the Government on behalf of taxpayers because the proceeds will be invested in new assets like modern schools and hospitals. The money would otherwise have to be borrowed from overseas lenders. 
David Shearer 
: How are New Zealanders going to be better off if the Government sells the assets when they are under threat of court action and possibly reduced in value because of uncertainty in sharemarkets that are currently unstable? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I would not agree with the assertions of the member on a number of those points. In terms of the latter point well equity markets go through various phases but that has not stopped plenty of other companies embarking on the mixed-ownership model including Fairfax recently with its sell-down of 49 percent of TradeMe. 
David Shearer 
: What does he consider the dollar value reduction in the value of Mighty River Power is as a result of the uncertainty over the court action? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I do not think it is possible to speculate that the member is even right in making the assumption. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If as the Prime Minister says “Nobody owns the water.” then on what basis does he purport to sell it? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: If I understand the question correctly we are proposing to sell 49 percent of the shares in Mighty River Power. We are not proposing to sell water. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There is no power company in this country that is doing hydro power that does not have to have the most vital ingredient— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Is this a point of order? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: —yes it is—which is namely water. [ 
Interruption 
] No water no power company. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Members may have—I am on my feet and there will be silence. The Prime Minister gave a perfectly legitimate answer to the member’s question and there is nothing more I can do about that. Certainly the point of order is not a point of order. To debate whether or not selling Mighty River Power is to sell water is not a point of order at all. It is a debating point. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Are you saying it is a debating point that a hydro-power company— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will resume his seat. He is now debating further. I invite the member to reflect that that is not remotely a point of order. It is not remotely a point order. Not under the longest stretch of imagination is it a point of order. 
David Shearer 
: When he said yesterday that it is possible that a court action could “have a cost for Mighty River Power … for every business and every household in New Zealand” did he mean that New Zealanders may have to pay for the liability while private shareholders are able to get the profit? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: No I was making an assumption that if one day a court assumed that Maori owned water—and that is the assumption that was put forward by the Maori Council if you look at the statement made by Maanu Paul the other night when he said— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Give him a hand. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I will tell you what you need: you need a few people to vote for you and you can become the leader because the Labour Party has now changed the way that it elects its leader. No wonder David Cunliffe is not here; he is out with the unions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! If members interject they may well have their interjections responded to and it will tend to lead to disorder. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Here we go. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I am waiting for you to sit down. He sometimes dips occasionally Mr Speaker. I do not— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Hon Trevor Mallard point of order. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: The point I was making is I thought that you were going to reprimand the Prime Minister for suggesting that you may be elected the leader of the Labour Party. That is most unlikely. You have not taken out your membership—yet. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have heard sufficient. I know that it is the first day back after a break but I think we have had our fun. The right honourable Prime Minister in reply to the question. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: In reply to the question the point I was simply making was that some in the Maori Council—for instance the chairman Maanu Paul and I will quote what he said on TV3 the other night: “Maori own the freshwater. … We need to sit down and work out how much you are going to pay us to use our water.” That is an example where if that was the case then all businesses and consumers in New Zealand would theoretically have to pay for that right. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does the Prime Minister accept that Mighty River Power cannot operate without water which he has said nobody owns; that being the case on what basis does he purport to sell a share of it? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Mighty River Power does not own water. Mighty River Power has long-term water rights and the sale would be the sale of the earning stream effectively of Mighty River Power. 
David Shearer 
: Is the Government considering listing some of the State-owned enterprise’s shares on the Australian stock exchange; if so how does that fit with his commitment to have 85 to 90 percent of the company owned by New Zealanders? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: The Government has not made a decision on that although it is taking advice from Treasury. I would simply point out that eight of the top 10 companies on the NZX are also listed on the ASX including Air New Zealand which was put on the ASX by the then—I assume—Labour Government. The reason why the advice in one instance has been that it is a good idea to do that is that the mandates of Australian funds that invest on behalf of New Zealanders often require them to be listed on the ASX. The reality is that in terms of New Zealand companies that are dual-listed on the exchange—if one looks at those—the vast overwhelming bulk actually trade their shares in New Zealand. So Auckland Airport is 98 percent traded in New Zealand and 2 percent on the ASX; Chorus is 88 percent traded in New Zealand and 12 percent on the NZX; Infratil is 96 percent on the New Zealand exchange 4 percent on the NZX; Sky TV is 90 percent and 10 percent; and it goes on. So it is possible but it would simply be for liquidity reasons. 
David Shearer 
: In light of his answer can he guarantee then that his commitment that he gave at the election last year that 85 to 90 percent of the company will be owned by New Zealanders will stand? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes. Interestingly enough actually— 
Hon Members 
: How? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Well because the Government controls the build book. But interestingly enough actually when I was in Australia the week before last I actually met with Origin which of course has a substantial ownership in Contact Energy. One of the interesting things that the Origin board told me was that in fact the 80000-plus retail shareholders that it has had in New Zealand have stayed consistent for a long period of time. They have not wanted to sell. In spite of all the fearmongering from the Labour Party that there would be sales to overseas people it has not taken place. 
David Shearer 
: Can the Prime Minister give us an undertaking that Mighty River Power will not be delayed in its sale or will that sale have to continue next year? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Well I can understand that the member is anxious to get his allocation and in due course he will But in reality it is certainly the Government’s intention that the shares are brought to the market in the third quarter of this year. It is not impossible that a court could delay the process but we would hope that was unlikely.