It was bound to happen. There are some Maori dead set against the sale of state-owned assets and some waiting eagerly for the prospectus to arrive.
I found what wasn't said, at the meeting in Rotorua last month, most interesting.
The meeting kicked off the Government's nationwide iwi consultation on the proposed asset sales. It was very well attended. I sat in the hotel foyer trying hard to catch what was being said in the main room. The Hon. Bill English outlined what the Government proposed; the sale of some state assets with the removal of Section 9 of the SOE Act being considered. Section 9 states that "nothing in this Act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi". When the meeting was opened up for questions the exchanges became more heated. I sat thinking "I've heard all this before, over 20 years ago".
I was working in the area of Maori development in the mid 1980s when the first wave of SOEs were being established. I attended many of the meetings that saw a last ditch effort made to have Section 9 included in the new SOE Act. The Act even then, caused widespread dissension and not just with Maori. New Zealanders saw legislation about to be introduced that had the potential to sell not only our assets but possibly the ground they sat on as well. A number of prominent, respected Maori leaders recognised there would be no obligation on new owners of SOEs to recognise the special relationship the Crown had with Maori, through the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.
The majority of Treaty settlements were still a long way off and could be prejudiced if new owners were in control of assets that Maori believed should be part of their future settlements. I remember the calls made directly to the Prime Minister and the late flights made to Wellington. Sir Graham Latimer of the New Zealand Maori Council and the late Sir Hepi Te Heu Heu brought their considerable mana to the lobbying cause for the inclusion of Section 9. Through their efforts and reasoned arguments Section 9 was included. Now 26 years later Maori are again lobbying. Only this time it's to have Section 9 retained.
The argument is essentially the same as that put by Sir Graham and Sir Hepi. Section 9 merely seeks to remind the Crown that acting with honour is not something you do when you feel like it. You can't pick and choose. And you don't attach a timeframe. Your obligations as a Treaty signatory require continued commitment. This also applies to the other Treaty partner, Maori. I'm finding it hard to understand why the Government even considered removing Section 9. And it does appear they have pulled back on this, for now.
What is their concern? Do they think investors, particularly overseas investors, will shy away from buying shares in the SOEs already earmarked for sale? If that's the case then their thinking is wrong. That never stopped investors 26 years ago, when Section 9 was included, and it won't stop them now. In 2012 New Zealand's natural resources, including our water, are viewed as highly desirable investments. And it won't be New Zealand mom and pop investors standing at the front of the investor's queue.
They have been badly bitten over the past 5 years with their savings disappearing along with the 30 financial investment companies that went to the wall. But wait, there's a new kid on the block! Those who are now in a position to buy shares when this round of SOEs come up for sale are the numerous Maori representative organisations. Through their Treaty settlements they have significant investment dollars going begging. These organisations weren't on the scene 25 years ago.
For state assets to remain in New Zealand ownership, albeit to the tune of 49 per cent shareholding, it will very likely be Maori investors putting their money up. They were present at the meeting in Rotorua sitting quietly not saying a word. They have their own number crunchers doing the crunching right now. I have no doubt they'll be first in line when the prospectus is issued. How's that for irony!
