Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18244] 
2. 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by all his statements on the sale of State-owned assets? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. In particular I stand by my statement that we will proceed with the mixed-ownership model only if it meets the following tests: firstly that the Government maintain a majority controlling stake by owning more than 50 percent of the company; secondly that New Zealand investors be at the front of the queue for shareholding and that we are confident of widespread and substantial New Zealand share ownership; thirdly that the companies involved present good opportunities for investors; fourthly that the capital freed up would be used on behalf of taxpayers to fund new public assets thereby reducing the pressure on the Government to borrow; and finally that the Government be satisfied that industry-specific regulations adequately protect New Zealand consumers. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How did National’s sale of Contact Energy which resulted last year in $100 million of New Zealand money going offshore and since 1999 $1 billion going offshore help New Zealand? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Foreign ownership can from time to time have benefits to New Zealand. We have seen that in the past and I am sure we will see that in the future. But Contact Energy— 
Hon Members 
: Oh! 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: There are lots of private assets out there that might be bought but Contact Energy is a company that is performing very well. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does his statement that sale offshore of New Zealand’s State-owned community-owned assets will happen in the future reflect the fact that though Contact Energy was to be sold to mum and dad investors the majority ownership is offshore and 80 percent of the shares are owned by less than 1 percent of the shareholders? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Firstly the statement referred to by the Leader of the Opposition was a statement I did not actually make; anyone who wants to look at  
Hansard 
 will see that I am correct. Let us be honest: the Leader of the Opposition has a lot of problems with his statements. He has put up a billboard that says: “Let’s not Labour” but he missed out the word “have”; it should read: “Let’s not have Labour”. I agree with that. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How did— 
Hon Member 
: It wasn’t very funny. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: It was not very funny John; not at all. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Members are entitled to raise points of order and the House will not react in that way unless members want to leave it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Again I think it is a matter of whether the House has been misled. A billboard put up by Cameron Slater on the Labour Party website— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: —cannot be ascribed to— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am on my feet. I invite members to look back at the question asked of the Prime Minister. I could not discern the question as the Speaker. I listened very carefully. I thought that if I was the Minister answering it I would not know what the question was. It was a statement and the Prime Minister made a statement in return in the same general subject area. I accept fully that the member would not have particularly wanted to hear that statement but the remedy lies in asking succinct questions that are capable of answer. Then I will insist that Ministers respond properly and answer them. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How did National’s sale of the Bank of New Zealand to the National Australia Bank for $1.5 billion help New Zealand when since that sale it has returned dividends to Australian shareholders of $12.4 billion? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Some asset sales have been good things for New Zealand. Others have performed less well. All I know is that under a Labour Government that Phil Goff was a member of more were sold than were sold under a National Government. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: If the average total return to the shareholders of the State-owned assets was 17.5 percent as the Prime Minister has answered in this House and if the dividend yield of the State-owned power companies is 7.6 percent why does it make sense to sell those assets and lose the dividends for ever to repay debt that currently costs 6 percent? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: The average dividend yield on the State-owned enterprises portfolio is 4.6 percent. The average Government bond rate is 6 percent. So in the first instance that makes sense. But if the Leader of the Opposition does not want to apply risk as a factor I have a suggestion for him. Why does he not go and borrow $60 billion and buy every company on the New Zealand Exchange if he is so keen on the idea? 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the majority of New Zealand’s State-owned enterprises have already been sold? If selling most of New Zealand’s publicly owned assets has not to date fixed the economy why would selling the rest of them make any positive difference? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes—by Labour. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is the average dividend paid by the three State-owned enterprises over the last 5 years 7.6 percent? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I do not have the number to hand but probably. But it applies also a risk factor. As I said to the member if he wants to completely discount risk why does he not have a policy of going out and borrowing $60 billion and buying every company on the New Zealand Exchange? 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What gives the National-ACT Government the right to sell assets built by New Zealanders and paid for by generations of New Zealand taxpayers when the majority of New Zealanders are clearly opposed to that policy? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: It is a shame the member was not giving that speech back in 1988 or whenever it was. The Government intends to sell off up to 49 percent of up to four companies that are currently in its stock. One of the reasons for doing that is to invest in more assets than we currently have. Is this microphone on? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the Prime Minister. Can we make sure that the Prime Minister’s microphone is activated please. I invite the Prime Minister to try again. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I will start again. The Government’s intention is to float up to 49 percent but retain the majority of control of potentially four companies. It will use those funds to amongst other things purchase even more assets so that at the end of this process New Zealand taxpayers will own more assets than they currently do today. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is that one of the policies that Dr Brash has indicated to him that he lacks spine on? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Members cannot ask that kind of—[ 
Interruption 
] I am on my feet. The House will come to order. The member knows he cannot ask that kind of question. Members cannot impugn the integrity of another member of the House and it has been known for a long time in this House that members cannot allege that another member lacks courage in any way at all. The member knows that and that question was asked for other reasons. Therefore I am not going to allow him a further supplementary question to repeat it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Again I do not want to continue too much in argument with you but I ask you to listen to the tape. I did not indicate that the member lacks spine; I asked whether Dr Brash had told him that he did. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear what the member said but we cannot allow that to be used as a strategy for making a similar—[ 
Interruption 
] I am on my feet and there will be silence all round. I accept that it is a day of tension and there have been transgressions on both sides today. I ask the House to come back to a little more order please.