'Destroyer Qantas' dispute fails to find enough lift for takeoff

By VERNON SMALL deputy political editor

A row between United Future leader Peter Dunne and Australian Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson has turned into a storm in an Air New Zealand Express Class plastic teacup.

Last week Mr Dunne, relying on an interpretation by Radio New Zealand, said Mr Anderson should clarify his reported comments that it was "in Australia's interest to make sure many international airlines disappear over the next few years while Australia retains a strong flight-carrier".

It seemed Mr Anderson wanted Qantas' rivals wiped out at a time when it was planning to spend $550 million on a 22.5 per cent stake in New Zealand's flag-carrier.

Mr Anderson's press office subsequently called Mr Dunne to deny the report, but the United Future leader seemed unconvinced.

The original report, carried in the Australian Financial Review last Wednesday, quoted Mr Anderson saying: "I believe that Australia needs to think carefully about how we make certain that, as many international airlines ... disappear over the next few years, Australia still has a flag-carrier and a strong flag-carrier at the end of it."

That seemed to be a wish to preserve Qantas, not to drive others into the ground.

Mr Dunne declined to comment further yesterday.

Last week he said it appeared a different set of stories was being told in Australia about the Qantas-Air NZ deal than here in New Zealand.

"If Air New Zealand feels it has to gloss this to New Zealanders and Qantas feels it has to gloss it to Australia, it is not a particularly good deal all round," said Mr Dunne.

Meanwhile, United Future, National and Act have asked Speaker Jonathan Hunt to allow a snap debate over the planned buy-in when Parliament resumes today.

The Government, which has an 82 per cent stake in Air New Zealand, has refused to debate the merits of the deal, leaving itself open to Opposition attacks.

It has cited legal advice that it should remain silent or risk being an insider trader. It could also lose its right to vote on the deal if it was seen to be influencing negotiations.

Prime Minister Helen Clark said yesterday that her deputy Michael Cullen would relish "giving certain people a lecture" on why he could not comment.

"When you have people like [Act MP Stephen] Franks saying it is all a simple matter of getting a waiver from the stock exchange, when he appears to overlook the application of securities legislation, I think there could be some benefit in a lecture from Dr Cullen on the matter."

Mr Franks said Dr Cullen could comment if he wanted to, although he might have a technical problem if an official had price-sensitive information. But Mr Franks welcomed a debate with Dr Cullen, "especially if his able assistant, Attorney-General Margaret Wilson, joins in".