Q+A: Shane Taurima Interviews Tony Ryall
Q+A: Shane Taurima Interviews Tony
Ryall
Government keeps door open to
delaying asset sales: “Let me be quite clear here. If the
government doesn’t get a good price, the government
isn’t going to sell.”
Ryall won’t say what
“a good price” would be, but confirms he has received
advice on what that price should be.
Not a cent of
the profits from Mighty River Power sale will go to pay down
debt: “All the proceeds in Mighty River Power are going to
avoid us having to get more debt.”
Changing
ownership of power companies won’t make any difference to
power prices or job numbers.
No guarantees of New
Zealand ownership of the 49% after float: “…while
we’re going to aim to have 85% to 90% of these companies
New-Zealand owned at float, what happens after that is
really determined by the individual New Zealand shareholders
and entities.”
Assets won’t be sold “to the
highest bidder”, as government seeks to keep assets in New
Zealand hands: “There is a tension, a
trade-off.”
Ryall concedes government would have
got more if it had sold to a single buyer, but National
wouldn’t have received the support it did at the election
if it had done that.
“…we would not have the
mandate that we got at the election if we had proposed that
it would be a 49% sell-off to one
shareholder.”
Ryall won’t endorse Treasury’s
valuation of Mighty River Power: “We’re going to have to
wait to see what comes out from the sales
process.”
Mighty River Power sale planned for
late in third quarter – not in the next few weeks. Won’t
start creating register of interest in shares until August
or September.
Q+A, 9-10am
Sundays on TV ONE. Repeats of Q&A will screen on TVNZ7 at
9pm Sundays and 9am and 1pm on Mondays.
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 TONY
RYALL
SHANE
TAURIMA
Thank you, minister, for joining us this
morning.
TONY RYALL – State-Owned
Enterprises
Minister
Yeah, good
morning.
SHANE
Let’s start off. Do you have a sale date for
Mighty River
Power?
TONY
Well, the government’s been quite clear that
we’re looking to start the sales process in the third
quarter of this financial year, rather this calendar year,
and as soon as we make a decision to proceed with sale,
we’ll let you know, and we’ll set out the timeframe for
everybody to see
then.
SHANE So
anytime from next month to September - could it happen in a
couple of weeks’
time?
TONY
No, well, it’s not going to happen in a couple of
weeks’ time. Over the next month or two, the government
will make a decision about whether to push the go button,
provided the market’s right, that there’s sufficient
interest, that we’ll get a good price for the New Zealand
tax payers.
SHANE
So we’re looking about August,
September.
TONY
Yeah, around about that time, we’d be looking to
make a decision, and then we start what we’re calling a
pre-registration process, which, for a number of weeks,
people who want to participate can register that they’d
like to receive a copy of the prospectus. And then we’d go
into the full sales process after
that.
SHANE
Given that it’s so imminent, do you have any idea
what the share price will
be?
TONY
Well, no. That will be set by what we find from our
various putting together of various offers and expressions
of interest and the market itself. So that’ll be much
closer to the time that people will get an idea of what the
actual issue price is, and of course the market price will
be indicated once they’re floated on the New Zealand Stock
Exchange.
SHANE
Because you want Mum and Dad investors to buy these
shares, do they have to be reasonably priced or low priced,
indeed?
TONY
Well, they have to be a fair price to be attractive
to as many New Zealanders as possible. And that’s one of
our major objectives. While we’re trying to make sure that
we can control our nation’s debt into the future, we also
have to make sure that we provide opportunities for New
Zealanders to invest in these businesses. So we do have to
make sure it’s a good price. I’m sure it will be if
everything comes together. That’s part of the programme.
And New Zealanders will be able to see that information when
the prospectus and the pre-registration information is
available.
SHANE
Treasury estimates that Mighty River Power is worth
$3.75 billion. Now, 49% of that is $1.8 billion. Do you
expect to get that
much?
TONY
Well, look, we’re going to have to wait to see
what comes out from the sales process. I’m not going to
speculate what the value
is-
SHANE But
is that a fair indicative area that you’re looking
at?
TONY
Well, that’s certainly the price that the
Treasury has indicated that is the value of the company.
What comes out from the actual sales process comes out from
the sales process. I can’t speculate on what the value of
the business will be. What I can tell you, though, is the
government’s got a lot of objectives here, not only to
control debt, but also to make sure we have widespread New
Zealand ownership and that there are more investment
opportunities for New Zealanders. Underscoring all of this,
of course, is that the government retains 51%
control.
SHANE
So does all of that mean a lower
price?
TONY
Uh, look, in terms of a lower price, I’m not
speculating on what the price will be. But the value for New
Zealand is important. Certainly, if the government had
decided to adopt the approach that we saw in the ‘80s and
the early ‘90s, where the government was just going to
sell the 49% stake to the highest bidder - maybe 49% to an
overseas bidder - we might get a better price than we would
if we weren’t going to have a float on the sharemarket.
But I don’t think we’d get the support at the election
that we got if we had proposed that. So this is not like the
asset sales that we’d seen in the ‘80s and early ‘90s,
which was selling them off to whoever the highest bidder is.
This is a different approach. This is more of the approach
that you saw with Auckland International Airport, where the
government is making it a priority to get as many everyday
New Zealanders as shareholders as we possibly
can.
SHANE So
it’s not about debt? You’re
sacrificing?
TONY
Uh, it’s certainly about debt. You know, New
Zealand’s debt is currently $52 billion, $53 billion.
Expected to go to $72 billion in the next three years.
That’s getting to a level that we’re uncomfortable with.
That’s the reason why we want to sell a minority stake in
these assets, free up some cash that can then be invested in
the other priority assets that New Zealanders want in the
future.
SHANE
But you’re not going to get as much as you
could.
TONY
Oh, we’ve been upfront about this all the time.
There is a tension, a trade-off, between selling the whole
lot, the 49% to one investor, like they did in the ‘80s
and the early ‘90s, versus trying to make sure we have
widespread New Zealand ownership. We’ve always been
upfront about that. There is a tension. But we would not
have the mandate that we got at the election if we had
proposed that it would be a 49% sell-off to one shareholder.
What New Zealanders understood very clearly was that we had
a priority to have as widespread a New Zealand ownership as
possible, and of course there’s a price trade-off in
that.
SHANE
I’m interested to talk about the Mum and Dad
investors, because say come September, Mum and Dad, they buy
shares for $5 a share. A couple of years down the track, an
overseas buyer or investor comes along and offers them $20 a
share. Is there anything stopping Mum and Dad investors from
on-selling those
shares?
TONY
No, there’s not going to be anything to stop
everyday New Zealanders from having choices about who they
sell their shares to. What’s important to remember is that
the government retains 51% control whatever happens, with a
limit of 10% on any other shareholder. But we’re not
proposing restrictions that will stop everyday people from
choosing how they might sell their shares or who they sell
them to.
SHANE
So you’ve just stressed New Zealand ownership,
but you can’t do anything about
it?
TONY
Well, it’s for the people who own the shares to
make those choices. But if you look at what probably is the
closest to a mixed-ownership model that many people would be
aware of, and that’s the Port of Tauranga, that’s a very
interesting experience there. 55% of the Port of Tauranga is
owned by local government, sort of like government
interests, and 45% is on the sharemarket. What we’re
finding with the Port of Tauranga is that it is in fact the
New Zealanders who are buying out the overseas shareholders.
In that mixed-ownership model type company, the New Zealand
shareholding is increasing. So I think that over time, New
Zealanders will see the benefits of the mixed-ownership
model programme. One of the key objectives is to increase
the number of investment opportunities for individuals,
KiwiSaver, super funds, government financial institutions.
So while we’re going to aim to have 85% to 90% of these
companies New-Zealand owned at float, what happens after
that is really determined by the individual New Zealand
shareholders and entities about what they
do.
SHANE
Interesting you talk about the Port of Tauranga,
because we only have to look across the ditch at Queensland
Rail as an example. 35% of their shares have gone offshore.
Couldn’t that happen
here?
TONY
Well, it depends on what everyday New Zealanders
do. But in the end, 51% remains in New Zealand control -
that’s the government - with a 10% cap on any other
shareholder. I think if you look at the experience with Port
of Tauranga, you’re seeing the New Zealanders buying out
the overseas interests. Now, the key thing here is to make
sure that we have those opportunities for New Zealanders,
and when these companies float, the government has the power
to decide what classes of shareholders get the shares, and
we’re making it clear that we expect 85% to 90% of the
companies at float will be owned by New Zealand
interests.
SHANE
But it sounds like that the Prime Minister isn’t
prepared to take that risk. He’s quite keen, he’s quite
supportive of introducing some type of loyalty scheme. Do
you support such a
scheme?
TONY
Well, we’re certainly going to look at it, and
there are some benefits in such an approach, because it does
send a very clear message to New Zealanders that the
mixed-ownership model programme is about them. It is about
everyday people having an opportunity to invest in a wider
range of companies on the New Zealand Stock Exchange. Over
the next month or two, we’re going to be looking at this
experience in Australia and elsewhere and the use of loyalty
shares as an incentive for ordinary investors to
participate, and we’ll make some decisions on those much
closer to the time of the
float.
SHANE
So why is there nothing around a loyalty scheme in
the bill
currently?
TONY
Because in terms of the allocation of the shares
and the way that the offer is put together, that is a
decision that the government makes closer to the time of the
float. It’s not the sort of thing that you’d put in the
legislation. But our government has been quite upfront and
clear that we expect 85% to 90% of these companies at float
to be owned by New
Zealanders.
SHANE
You’re talking a lot about New Zealand ownership,
but there’s nothing - nothing - that protects New Zealand
ownership in the bill, is
there?
TONY
Oh, there is. There is definitely stuff in the
legislation, and that is 51% of the shares will continue to
be owned by the New Zealand government, and there’ll be a
restriction of 10% of any other shareholder. New Zealand
ownership is being enshrined in the legislation - 51% New
Zealand government - and in the constitution of the
companies. So don’t for one minute think there’s no
restriction on that. It’s in the law. 51% government
ownership.
SHANE
So if the government is going to have 51% and have
control, does it really matter who owns the other 49%, when
you’ve got that target of keeping 85% to 90% of all shares
here in New Zealand? Does it really matter who owns the
other 49%?
TONY
Well, that target is with respect to the float.
It’s up to New Zealanders who will get these shares to
decide what they want to do with them. We think that the
whole mixed-ownership programme is about providing more
opportunities for New Zealanders to invest in the New
Zealand sharemarket, in the sorts of businesses that many
people are interested in investing in. So I think that all
stacks up to a very, very sensible programme which is about
helping to control our country’s debt and get the country
through the difficult economic times that we’re
facing.
SHANE
You’re talking about debt again. I’m interested
to know - the money that you’re going to get from Mighty
River Power, how much of that is going on
debt?
TONY
Well, the programme is about controlling debt. What
we know is we started
in-
SHANE So
nothing? Do you have a number for us? How much of Mighty
River Power is going on
debt?
TONY
Well, let me tell you what’s happening, because
all the proceeds in Mighty River Power are going to avoid us
having to get more
debt-
SHANE So
nothing specifically on debt? Just to control the debt, is
that right?
TONY
That’s right. Because at the moment, we’re
going from $8 billion when we started in 2008. The debt’s
now around $52 billion. We’re expecting to be at $72
billion in another three years’ time Now, to help keep us
at that level, we are selling these assets partially over
the next three to five years. Those proceeds are being put
into the future investment fund which will fund investment
in other important public assets - new schools, new roads,
new hospitals-
SHANE
But just to clarify, just to get a very clear
answer from you, none of the proceeds will actually go to
pay off debt.
TONY
All the proceeds go into avoid having to borrow
more debt, because we’re actually going to be borrowing
more money in the next three years, and the sale of these
assets allows us to avoid having to borrow more
money.
SHANE
Can we talk very briefly about the social costs,
because groups like Grey Power as an example, and we saw a
march down in Dunedin yesterday. About 1000 people out there
protesting against this. They say it’s all about making
profits. Can you guarantee that as a result of these sales
we won’t see, for example, power prices going
up?
TONY
Look, I don’t think there’ll be a minister in
any government that will promise the price of
power…
SHANE
So that’s a
no?
TONY
…won’t be going up. What I can tell you,
though, is that what’s more important here is not the
ownership of the companies; it’s the competitive
environment in which they operate in. In about a six or
seven month period, about 300,000 New Zealanders have
changed power companies. Now, that tells you we’re in a
competitive-
SHANE
But we’re also told, though, that mixed ownership
does matter. Private companies charge, on average, 3% more
than state
owned.
TONY
I’ve seen those numbers that have been quoted by
the Green Party in that case, and what’s clear in that is
there are a number of private companies that are cheaper
than the state companies. What is important is that it
doesn’t reflect the different types of customer base. So
power companies have more rural customers. Others are more
focused in the urban
areas.
SHANE
So no guarantee on power prices going up. Sorry, we
have to start moving on. But what about job
losses?
TONY
Well, no minister is going to guarantee on power
prices. I didn’t see any minister in the previous
government promise that when they were 100% owned, power
prices weren’t going up. They went up 72% under the
previous Labour Government. Now we’ve got a more
competitive power environment. There was a 14% increase in
power prices between 2008 and 2011. We’ve now got a
situation in New Zealand where hundreds of thousands of
people are switching power companies all the time, and that
indicates a much better competitive
environment.
SHANE
Can I just ask you briefly about job losses,
because Queensland Rail, and we’ve been talking about
Queensland Rail. They laid off 600 workers last year.
They’re planning another 500 workers this year. Could we
have job losses here as a result of these
sales?
TONY
Well, that depends on the companies. The companies
are operating in a competitive environment. They look at
their staffing numbers all the time. I think that would
happen whether they were 100% owned by the government or 51%
owned by the government. They’ll always look at their cost
structures and look to get those as competitive as possible,
because they’re in quite a competitive market. When
you’ve got 300,000 customers in about a seven-month period
swapping companies, there’s a lot of competition out
there.
SHANE
Is this a good time to sell? Given what’s
happening around the world, how confident are you that this
is a good time to sell and that you’re going to get a good
price?
TONY
Well, let me be quite clear here. If the government
doesn’t get a good price, the government isn’t going to
sell. And we’ve been upfront about that from January 2011,
from when we first announced this
policy.
SHANE
So can I ask you, what is a good
price?
TONY
Well, we’re getting advice on the price that we
expect to get, and if we don’t get the price that’s
reasonable, we’re not going to
sell.
SHANE So
you’re not going to tell us what that price
is?
TONY
Well, why would we do that? Because this is a
competitive environment, and we’re going to have people
seeking to buy their
shares-
SHANE
Because it’s publicly owned. It’s our company,
isn’t it?
TONY
Uh, but you want us to protect the value of those
shares so we get best value, and so we don’t want to
release any of that commercial and competitive information.
But let me reassure you that unless the government gets a
good price, we’re not going to sell these
shares.
SHANE
Minister, we will leave it there. Thank you very
much for your time this
morning.
ENDS