Cosgrove Clayton: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Sitting date: 30 January 2013. Volume:687;Page:7623. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour) 
: 
 Before I talk about asset sales I want to touch on three points that have been raised by speakers. Firstly there are two that Ms Tolley raised. She accused the Labour Party of being “spend spend spend”. That we spend spend spend—that is what she accused us of. Everything is about spending. [ 
Interruption 
] That is right she says. There is a wee problem with that. You see in Government we ran 9 years of surpluses and I remember the debate when I was Associate Minister of Finance when Bill English got up and was kicking Michael Cullen me and others around for not spending the money. Of course we did not spend the money which this Government inherited which ensured we are not in the mire like Greece and Spain but we are getting close to it thanks to these guys. 
The second point she raised and a number of speakers have raised was apprenticeships. These guys have had the road to Damascus experience. This is the party that in 1995 abolished the Apprenticeship Act—point one. Then when we got into Government in 1999 we introduced a thing called Modern Apprenticeships. What is our record on that? Before I get to that I will read you a quote from that genius Nick Smith when we introduced Modern Apprenticeships. This is what he said on 13 December 2000: “I am not convinced as to what great gain there will be for young New Zealanders wanting to work and build up skills in this sort of window-dressing”. Well I tell you what. It was a hell of a lot of window dressing all right because by the end of our time in Government we had 4500 kids who had got their ticket and 10000 additional ones who were in apprenticeships called Modern Apprenticeships which National members carped on about had a go at and poured cold water on. They did not like it. National abolished the Apprenticeship Act and now after 4 years—4 years—when we could have had after the 2 and a bit years since the earthquakes thousands of young people in apprenticeships halfway or three-quarters of the way through their time out there ready to go instead of importing people which we now have to. These geniuses get up and say “We are now believers in apprenticeships.” Well I reckon maybe. 
The other point I make to Ms Tolley is this. We have had Gateway career training pathways tunnels and God knows what else but the one thing a young person needs at the end of the pathway the gateway whatever is a thing called a job which she never spoke about—never spoke about. Maybe since we have heard there will be a Gerry Brownlee park in Wellington a Gerry Brownlee park those young people may be employed in the drive-through that is going to be built in that park I assume. There is another big park in Wellington I am told called the Cake Tin. If it is nicknamed the Cake Tin I wonder what “Gerry Brownlee Park” will be nicknamed. Maybe the “Breadbasket”—sourdough of course. 
But now we get on to some more serious issues. Asset sales—the big hit the big plan other than the warrant of fitness in the Prime Minister’s statement. Here is what Brian Fallow said on 24 January: “It is folly to press on full steam ahead with the partial privatisation of the state-owned power companies when the future of Tiwai [Point] aluminium smelter is unresolved.” Why is that important? That is important because if Meridian Energy is bent over the barrel and that contract goes that creates oversupply by about 14 percent. What does that do? That then says which generator are you going to close? Maybe one of Genesis’ coal-fired power stations? That has an impact on Solid Energy which supplies the coal. What happens then to the state of power prices? It is good news for consumers. Prices go through the floor. It is bad news for the electricity generators because their profit projections go down the value of those companies goes down the share price of course goes down and then we have of course all this based on what Brian Fallow calls “an uncertainty discount”. Either the Government takes a hit on the share price or those who want to invest in that share price as he quite rightly says will want an uncertainty discount so as to ensure they have not overpaid. 
There is one thing about an initial public offer one rule of thumb: clear the decks tie up all the issues tie everything down create confidence and present to the market—they should not in these cases of course—an offering that is high quality. But oh no. We have got legal action. Everyone is off to the Supreme Court. We have got the uncertainty of Tiwai we have got Solid Energy in a difficult position we have got Air New Zealand’s share price in a difficult position and we have got the global financial crisis. Who in their right mind in the private sector—I wonder whether if John Key was sitting at his desk at Merrill Lynch he would be turning to his clients and saying that now is a really good time to do it. 
Well I say like 80 percent of New Zealanders that no time is a good time to flog off the people’s revenue-generating assets. We know of course that Treasury has told us we are going to lose $100 million on the deal through dividends. We know that if you compare that to the price of borrowing. We also know given the Tiwai events and the state of the market that there is no way the Government can hang its hat on $5 billion to $7 billion worth of revenue that it will get back from the sale price. These guys were warned of these uncertainties. Bill English comes out and says “Maybe we might flog three off this year.” even though Brian Gaynor and other investors said basically that if you flood the market the market does not have the capacity to ensure that the share price and the return to the Government is maximised. Then he backtracked and said “OK we will only do two.” These people have been all over the place on asset sales and this is the only major strategy that they have as they borrow $300 million a week—to flog off the family silver. 
Then they say Kiwis will be first in the queue. Well we know that has virtually no credibility at all because if it did have credibility why is it that the Government is prepared to introduce a loyalty scheme for those shareholders who can afford two to three thousand bucks out of the household budget to go and buy them. Well I say this. The workers who were made redundant at the Hillside railway workshops will not be able to afford them. The workers who were made redundant at Solid Energy will not be able to afford $2000 to $3000 parcels $1000 parcels or $100 parcels. If the Government is going to keep that loyalty scheme in here is the prediction. I bet you a hundred bucks that it will expire after the next election. It is fictitious. It is about John Key and his pride and it is about John Key being bloody-minded enough to flog those assets off at whatever cost. He has had experts say it is not a good idea. He has had 80 percent of New Zealanders say it is not a good idea. He has had over 300000 New Zealanders sign a petition wanting a referendum who say “We do not want our assets which we have already sold flogged off.” But oh no. It is bloody-mindedness—absolute bloody-mindedness. 
I say this to the Government: it ain’t been a good start to the year. It has not been a good start to the year at all. They mentioned the reshuffle. Well it is true. John Key bayoneted the wounded. He bayoneted them—absolutely bayoneted them. And by God some of them were wounded big time—the member for Waimakariri for one. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Not all of them were wounded. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Not all of them were wounded oh no. But I have got to give credit to Hekia Parata. She is here today. There is a military term I am told. It is called hiding in plain sight—hiding in plain sight. I think the spooks and the spies try it. It is some sort of military thing—hiding in plain sight. Well I say that Hekia Parata after today is an absolute expert at hiding in plain sight. You look at the litany of botch-ups the emotional harm and stress that that Minister has caused not only to Christchurch but also to parents over the class ratios and to teachers over Novopay. That was too tough. That was whipped away from her. I got a letter from a person today who said: “Could somebody tell me what is the Minister of Education”—I am happy to give it to her—“responsible for?”. All the tough stuff as Chris Hipkins and others have said has been taken away from her. 
This of course by John Key’s own admission is the smoothest communicator in the team. Well by goodness! If this is smooth I would like to see rough—I would like to see rough I tell you. I really would like to see rough. You know grade 10 sandpaper I reckon—grade 10 sandpaper. If this is the best communicator in the pack after Novopay the student ratios and the botch-up in Christchurch then I tell you that Anne Tolley is looking pretty good. Pretty good—verbally I mean. So if this is smooth I would like to see rough. John Key could have done the right thing and said “I am sorry Miss Parata. Game over. You’re out of luck. It’s gone.” But no no his political reputation is gang-nailed pot-riveted and welded to hers. As one of my colleagues said I think yesterday her mistakes are now absolutely vulcanised to the Prime Minister. It ain’t been a good start this year for those guys.