Kiwibank sale to NZ Super, ACC privatisation by stealth

52 comments on “Kiwibank sale to NZ Super, ACC privatisation by stealth ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Lanthanide 1

   7 April 2016 at 12:35 pm

   I’m half expecting there to be tax cuts in the 2016 budget, that come into effect on 1st April 2017. This ‘special dividend’ will go towards paying for them.

   Putting them in place before the election, would force the opposition into campaigning to reverse them.
   • The Chairman 1.1

     7 April 2016 at 2:46 pm

     “I’m half expecting there to be tax cuts in the 2016 budget, that come into effect on 1st April 2017. This ‘special dividend’ will go towards paying for them.”

     Indeed.

     Last time National offered tax cuts, Labour responded by offering them as well.
2. Bill 2

   7 April 2016 at 12:36 pm

   Thankyou for offering up, what reads to me as a fairly concise explanation of this latest merry go round of nonsense from our government of market fundamentalists.
3. Colonial Viper 3

   7 April 2016 at 12:39 pm

   Thumbs up to Sir Michael Cullen, Labour’s greatest Finance Minister, for working this deal out. And for the Labour caucus who support him.
   • the pigman 3.1

     7 April 2016 at 11:45 pm

     *roll eyes*

     That Nats are doing exactly what the Labour/Alliance government did when they appointed Jim Bolger the first head of Kiwibank. It is a proven strategy.

     Cullen is a sellout, sure, primarily aligned with the careerist Labour advisors from when he was last in government (Grant Robertson, Jacinda Ardern, Hipkins, Curran). He doesn’t control the NZLP.
     • Colonial Viper 3.1.1

       8 April 2016 at 12:10 am

       Cullen, a sell out? OK. So what about Parker who said that Cullen’s concept was brilliant?

       Cullen and Parker together represent Labour’s finest existing financial expertise. Who are you to question them?

       Frankly, I think you need to get behind Labour on this and accept that this move with Kiwi Bank is a good, if not brilliant, idea.

       As such, Labour won’t be attacking or reversing this National Government initiative.
       • Chooky 3.1.1.1

         8 April 2016 at 10:19 am

         +100 CV…sure know who NOT to vote for!…and trying to persuade others NOT to as well!

         The New Zealand Labour Party are an utter disgrace..
         • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1.1

           8 April 2016 at 10:28 am

           We’ve been trying to point out the obvious to people for ages. And yet people still keep pushing for the “vote in the least shite of the big two parties” approach.

           I say no, dump the big two parties, support either the Greens or NZ First.

           Labour’s original reason for existing ended in the 1950s and 60s and its been struggling with a crisis of identity and class ever since.
           • Chooky 3.1.1.1.1.1

             8 April 2016 at 4:10 pm

             Andrew Little would be a good leader of the National Party and Parker et al good ministers…but this is not what traditional Labour Party people want
           • the pigman 3.1.1.1.1.2

             8 April 2016 at 8:34 pm

             You’re trying to characterize the entire NZLP caucus using a person who hasn’t been in the NZLP caucus for 8 years.

             Get a grip. Read beyond your existing prejudices. Follow Iain L-G on twitter, see what he says about the move.
             • Colonial Viper …

               8 April 2016 at 8:55 pm

               Yes, there are good people in the Labour caucus. And there are good people who are Labour Party members.

               As a Political Party however it is well past its use by date. Utterly without purpose, philosophy and direction.

               Unless you count “taking power from National” as a direction.
         • the pigman 3.1.1.1.2

           8 April 2016 at 8:47 pm

           +100 CV…sure know who NOT to vote for!…and trying to persuade others NOT to as well!

           Great to hear you’re comfortable with John Key as PM in 2017 and 2020 then Chooky, very productive of you joining CV in using misinformation to derail a chance of a change in government.

           Michael Cullen is not a Labour MP, but the Nat appointee (in the tradition I pointed out above where Labour used Bolger). He opposed Little’s leadership bid in 2014.

           Parker, who stood against Little, is out of the leadership team and holds neither Finance nor Economic portfolios (nor is he associate spokesman of either). So when CV disingenuously refers to them as “Labour’s finest existing financial expertise” and you play along, andt whip yourself into a messy, frothing little frenzy, you are doing absolutely nothing to support a change of the current, extremely damaging, National government.
           • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1.2.1

             8 April 2016 at 9:24 pm

             He opposed Little’s leadership bid in 2014.

             Correct.

             Cullen is a public supporter of Grant Robertson as Labour Leader ahead of Andrew Little.

             Grant Robertson controls one of the major power block in caucus. Perhaps the biggest one. He is also Labour’s future Finance Minister.

             Everyone can look at this and read the ABCs for themselves.
           • Chooky 3.1.1.1.2.2

             8 April 2016 at 9:42 pm

             nonsense Pigman…it is not essential to support Labour mindlessly in order to support a Left coalition government…luckily we have the Greens and New Zealand First to vote for ( or havent you heard of MMP yet)

             Labour has delusions of grandeur …as was shown when they blew Mana /Internet’s chances out of the water by opposing Hone Harawira in TTT

             ( this completely negated many New Zealanders vote for the Left last election and destroyed any chance of a Left coalition government)

             …Labour does not deserve to be the leading party on the Left imo ( and I come from a family of traditionally Labour voters)
4. SPC 4

   7 April 2016 at 12:56 pm

   The party that comes out of this worst is NZ Post. Selling its shares below full value and keeping only 2/5 of the money. The reduction in debt cost will be below the fall in Kiwibank profit flow. So who is Cullen acting for?

   An alternate deal where Kiwibank raised funds by floating shares to ACC and NZSF at 10% pa for 5 years would grow Kiwibank without reduction in NZ Post’s profit stream. Which over time would be of more benefit to affording debt cost and business capitalisation.

   This deal only prepares the way for NZ Post to further sell down its shareholding in Kiwibank (on the marketplace to private New Zealand investors as per power companies so ACC and NZSF can value their asset holding), but not to pay dividends to government but to cover its own on-going business losses.
5. Draco T Bastard 5

   7 April 2016 at 1:11 pm

   The shareholding minister, the person who gives directions to the board, is the Minister of Finance – Bill English. As such we can be pretty certain that this sale came down from the government.

   And Bill English did say that he wanted to sell Kiwibank back in 2008. It seems that ‘eventually’ has turned up now that they’ve found a way to sell it while claiming that they’re not selling it.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     8 April 2016 at 10:44 am

     And they managed to find a measure of political support from well known figures in Labour to help them do it.
     • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1

       8 April 2016 at 12:06 pm

       Exactly.
6. Das 6

   7 April 2016 at 1:30 pm

   “This will all end in tears” – quoting my very good friend who was once press secretary to a Minister.
7. Dialaey 7

   7 April 2016 at 1:31 pm

   As a foundation member of Kiwibank, I find this move deeply upsetting. I had joined Kiwibank in protest against the Aussie takeover of the old Trust Bank, as I prefer a NZ owned entity. I fear I will be looking for a new banking home if National continues to reign over this once proud and fair land.
8. Puckish Rogue 8

   7 April 2016 at 2:23 pm

   Well as posters on here like to point out Sir Michael Cullen is the reason NZ weathered the GFC so well so you just need to trust in him once again

   He had NZs best interests at heart then and he does now
9. The Chairman 9

   7 April 2016 at 2:48 pm

   Good points, Simon.

   I was just wondering what happens when NZ super starts being drawn down.

   Government are renowned for selling low and buying high.

   Perhaps we should demand a resale clause (a price cap) to be added to the deal to avert this scenario (shares later being sold on the open market).
10. Wayne 10

    7 April 2016 at 2:50 pm

    It seems to be a long bow that is being drawn here. I suspect it will be hard to convince the public that this is a privatization, or a prelude thereof.

    I also note that it is the Greens who are leading the charge on this issue. Labour is notably quiet.

    Over the years many commenters on this site have wanted to see the Super Fund and ACC using their many billions of dollars for precisely this kind of thing. But when it actually happens, it is all a terrible portent of disaster.

    I would have thought, and to be fair this is acknowledged by Louisson, that it will much easier to put new capital into Kiwibank with the new shareholding arrangements.

    I also suspect the five year rule of no sale by the Super Fund is designed to reassure middle New Zealand voters, particularly when coupled with the government’s clear statement that if there was a sale after five years, that the govt will buy the shares.

    Though National would like to be leading the government after 2021, they know that will be defying political precedent. In short, it is more likely that not that Labour will be holding the reins by then.

    So all this anxiety and suspicion seems overly wrought. Presumably it is simply because National has done it. However, I imagine that Dr Cullen actually came up with the idea. He wants to get NZ Post in better financial shape, and this is the easiest and most politically expedient way to do that.

    A special dividend of say $250 million would not fund any kind of tax cut, so that is hardly the reason.
    • Stuart Munro 10.1

      7 April 2016 at 3:03 pm

      Oh please! Blinglish is bankrupt – none of his policies are producing revenue growth – he’d sell his children at this point. Useless tosser.
      • seeker 10.1.1

        7 April 2016 at 3:29 pm

        “none of his policies are producing revenue growth”

        so true stuart……… what real policies has he ever mapped out anyway?.
      • Halfcrow 10.1.2

        7 April 2016 at 5:26 pm

        That is nice Stuart, that is an insult to tossers
      • Halfcrown 10.1.3

        7 April 2016 at 5:30 pm

        “Useless tosser.”

        Do you mind Stuart, that is an insult to tossers
    • The Chairman 10.2

      7 April 2016 at 3:39 pm

      Point by point, Wayne.

      “It seems to be a long bow that is being drawn here”

      It was a rational conclusion.

      “I suspect it will be hard to convince the public that this is a privatization, or a prelude thereof”

      It was rather compelling.

      “Labour is notably quiet”.

      Labour seemed rather supportive.

      “Over the years many commenters on this site have wanted to see the Super Fund and ACC using their many billions of dollars for precisely this kind of thing. But when it actually happens, it is all a terrible portent of disaster.”

      I doubt many here wanted the funds to be used to foster in privatization.

      ‘It will much easier to put new capital into Kiwibank with the new shareholding arrangements.’

      Simon highlighted putting new capital into Kiwibank will result in further diluting NZ post’s shares.

      “I also suspect the five year rule of no sale by the Super Fund is designed to reassure middle New Zealand voters, particularly when coupled with the government’s clear statement that if there was a sale after five years, that the govt will buy the shares”

      No doubt it was designed to reassure. However, Simon’s post highlighted it’s a false sense of security.

      “In short, it is more likely that not that Labour will be holding the reins by then.”

      Regardless who is holding the reins of power, do people really trust politicians? For example, look at what happened to Labour’s bottom lines (TPP).

      “A special dividend of say $250 million would not fund any kind of tax cut”

      It will put the books in better shape to enable National to offer them.
    • mickysavage 10.3

      7 April 2016 at 4:06 pm

      It makes partial privatisation long term almost inevitable. One of the three entities will seek to sell as soon as they can. And ACC and Cullen fund buying at what looks like a cheap price will incentivise profit taking.
    • Graeme 10.4

      7 April 2016 at 4:16 pm

      “A special dividend of say $250 million would not fund any kind of tax cut, so that is hardly the reason.”

      Come on, you’re a bit light there mate.

      According to English and reported this morning,

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11618271

      “English said there was a bit more negotiation to come. “We want to see the price that has been mentioned [$495 million] is the price that gets paid.

      “If that occurs then we would be expecting a special dividend in the range of
      well probably $300 to $350 million.”

      Asked if that would get him to a Budget surplus English replied, “It’s like recycling the capital – It won’t affect our surplus because of the way we account for it. But … we’ve got a big capital budget coming up, as we signaled before Christmas, and this will enable us to offset it to some extent.” ”

      Actually English is going to roll NZ Post for $350,000,000.00 to pay for a spend-up to enhance his re-election. Something that’s probably going to bankrupt NZ Post and force it’s sale, at liquidation sale prices, to one of National’s private sector mates.

      There’s a couple of word for that, begins with T and F, and if I did it I’d be doing a lengthy stint in the Big House.
      • Wayne 10.4.1

        7 April 2016 at 4:49 pm

        Graeme,

        It is hardly in the interest of the govt to bankrupt NZ Post. In fact NZ Post gets to retain between $100 and $150 million extra capital, even with the special dividend. That is a substantial amount of money.

        In any event consider the counterfactual. Imagine the political damage that would result if the govt let NZ Post go bankrupt and was sold off in some sort of fire sale. It would certainly be way more damage than for Solid Energy. John Key of all people is more than alert to that sort of political risk.

        I appreciate that many commenters here always want to believe the absolute worst about the govt, but some of these theories stretch credulity.
        • The Chairman 10.4.1.1

          7 April 2016 at 5:01 pm

          “It is hardly in the interest of the govt to bankrupt NZ Post”

          It depends on whose interest the Government is serving.

          “In fact NZ Post gets to retain between $100 and $150 million extra capital, even with the special dividend. That is a substantial amount of money.”

          It would be substantially more if it wasn’t going to the Government.

          “Imagine the political damage that would result if the govt let NZ Post go bankrupt and was sold off in some sort of fire sale”

          As the Government largely got away with the Solid Energy failure unaffected, it only encourages them to push it further next time around.
        • Graeme 10.4.1.2

          7 April 2016 at 5:27 pm

          Wayne,

          If I told you to sell your car / house / whatever and the told you to give me 2/3 of the sale price, and then told you that you were better off by 1/3 of the sale price because, “That is a substantial amount of money.”, you would have a fairly brusque response. Because that is what is going on here.

          I’m sorry but what is stretching credulity here is the attempts to justify this fraud.
          • Wayne 10.4.1.2.1

            7 April 2016 at 5:40 pm

            “fraud”, seriously?

            And is that what you think of Michael Cullen?
            • Graeme 10.4.1.2.1.1

              7 April 2016 at 6:13 pm

              I thought Key and English were honourable men once too.
            • Descendant Of Sssmith 10.4.1.2.1.2

              7 April 2016 at 6:15 pm

              It is theft.

              They could have “sold” 10% to get some capital to Kiwibank.

              The special dividend is theft. It is not an investment by either the super fund nor the ACC fund. Is the government paying interest on this special dividend. No way. How then is it any sort of investment.

              It is a transfer from those funds to the government.

              There was plenty of gnashing of teeth about the socialists/communists getting their hands on people’s super money should they come to power.

              It’s no surprise that it’s the fascists who have done this.

              We’ve seen this pattern from this government on a continual basis.

              The making of one SOE to sell part of it’s infrastructure to another SOE and to pay a special dividend.

              The making of Solid Energy buy a non-saleable Pike River Mine instead of the government.

              The theft of state housing rents paid by the poor to pay special dividends instead of fixing houses up.

              Supposedly SOE’s were set up to remove political interference – in reality (and many of us said this at the time) it was to remove public accountability and ensure political interference was done behind the scenes.

              What’s happening here is a pretty fucked up but consistent neo-liberal process.

              Reduce income and replace income with selling and stealing assets.

              This tax the rich less and sell is like convincing me to go to my boss and say give me a pay-cut. I understand you’ve got a big yacht to fuel. You clearly need the money more than me. I’ll just sell one of my kids to pay the mortgage.
              And the cool thing is that I do this voluntarily cause you’ve convinced me it’s the only way that things can be.

              And as I sell my kids I thank you for allowing me to have the freedom to do this.

              It’s fucked up and illogical.
              • Colonial Viper …

                7 April 2016 at 8:02 pm

                Not to mention the various financial derivatives and instruments that are being planned in the background around this deal.

                This is a Goldman Sachs specialty.

                They helped Greece conceal billions in debt from the EU using these special tools. (Although the EU elite knew exactly what was being done.)

                What are Goldman Sachs helping the Key Government to do?
                • Gristle …

                  7 April 2016 at 9:34 pm

                  Both the ACC and the Cullen super funds are essentially ring fenced from the government. Getting them to buy assets from the government (such as housing stock) or from other SOEs allows Mr English to get his hands on some of those ring fenced funds. And whilst he may list them as Government assets on its balance sheet he cannot dip into them. They have been growing and have already been used to buy into PPP ventures.

                  I should have listened to Dr Ross Armstrong (ex National Party President who was banished after double dipping with NZ Post and TVNZ). Dr Armstrong regularly pushed PPP and had sought to establish himself as the PPP broker in NZ. He pointed out the usefulness of having a slush fund such as ACC that could be tapped into from time to time. I thought it was just bullshit: it still is bullshit but it hasn’t stopped it from happening.

                  Remember that the Cullen fund has been consistently out performing most other funds, and if the Mr English had continued to invest in it, then it’s returns would have exceeded to cost of borrowing by approximately 220%.

                  Due to ACC changing its accounting approach in 2008 it had to carry enough equity to fully fund future liabilities: so if you lost a leg now ACC is supposed to have enough money to pay for all the costs you on Day 1 even though the costs will still be occurring in 5 years time. ACC levies went up (and Nick Smith preached that ACC on the verge of bankruptcy.). Fast forward to last year after it had saved enough of a war chest to be able to forward fund injury costs and Nick Smith announces that due to the enlightened management provided by National the ACC levies would drop.

                  It’s the size of this war chest that attracts Mr English. This is money that has been funded by New Zealanders specifically to compensate for their injuries (and in return New Zealander’s surrendered their ability to sue those who caused the injury.) No doubt all sorts of gannets are trying to access the funds and encouraging them to privatise.

                  Maybe they have been loaded with some lemons and selling an underpriced slice to the new investors makes their balance sheets look better. The government doesn’t gain in terms of assets so the sale could have been for a vertitable peppercorn. What the government has got is cashflow. Expect more deals like this to come.

                  Kiwibank’s capital requirements are still to be addressed. New capital will have to be injected and a lot of this has to be equity. Expect NZPosts shareholding to quickly drop below 50% as it will not have equity that it can inject. Actually it’s really surprising that given that analysts have been saying for a long time that KB need further capital, that the two new investors didn’t have to front up with the $450m to cover say a 30% purchase plus $250m for another 15% of new stock.

                  I’ve seen one corporate board continually fight itself into stalemates as each of the 3 equal shareholders directors sought to have decisions go in their own favour. It was a good way to waste millions of dollars and let competitors truss you like a chicken.

                  Anyway the sheep have been penned and all we are waiting for is the stock truck to arrive.
            • Stuart Munro 10.4.1.2.1.3

              7 April 2016 at 9:18 pm

              Suborned as the ambassador to the fishes was – National corrupt everything they touch – the grass turns yellow; the very rivers dry up and run with filth everywhere the Gnats have influence.
        • Sabine 10.4.1.3

          7 April 2016 at 5:34 pm

          Homelessness
          Poverty
          Hunger
          no jobs
          collapsing farming sector
          117+ billion debt and nothing to show for
          a PM who physically harasses a young women at her workplace and indecently fondles little girls hair without the consent of the little girls or their parents
          the farming sector up to eyeballs in debt
          underfunded Health sector
          increased GST

          So I appreciate that many National Party supporter here still believe the very best about the government, but some of these believes (after 8 years of National led Government) stretch credulity.
    • Lanthanide 10.5

      7 April 2016 at 7:43 pm

      “A special dividend of say $250 million would not fund any kind of tax cut, so that is hardly the reason.”

      Gosh, Wayne.

      Let’s say tax cuts they want to do cost $1B in total. Lets say they currently have enough room in the budget to pay for $750M of that, but they would need to borrow $250M, putting the books into the red.

      The $250M special dividend can be used to offset that, and let them say “tax cuts are coming totally from surplus and we are not borrowing to pay for tax cuts”.

      You are pretty easily duped by this sort of thing.
    • Jan Rivers 10.6

      8 April 2016 at 8:31 am

      Isn’t the point here that prior to the election we were reassured that there would be no further privatisations because there was ‘little left to sell’. This is effectively a sale because it will take $495M out of the public sphere and into debt reduction and make the bank at risk of falling into foreign hands.

      It matters little that there is no law change. The issue for me, and I suspect for many others, is one of false representation in pre-election comments and trust. There is a grave danger that this action will actually make KiwiBank less attractive than even the credit rating downgrade would imply to those 1m people who delight in having a banking option that is not simply a $4.7bn drain on New Zealand’s nett wealth.
11. Sacha 11

    7 April 2016 at 4:15 pm

    Mr English has said he wants about 2/3 of the sale proceeds as his ‘special’ dividend.

    As Idiot/Savant points out, that’s effectively laundering long-term investment fund money via an SOE straight into English’s clutches: http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2016/04/plunder.html

    Sure doesn’t do much for NZ Post’s books. The Board must have had some signal from their shareholder that he’d be relaxed about them not getting the best return.
12. Smilin 12

    7 April 2016 at 5:04 pm

    What can you say about a brilliant financial mind now working for the other side oh yeah austerity and privatisation walking hand in hand ready to jump ship
    Is there any real nzers left running this country ?
13. pat 13

    7 April 2016 at 7:15 pm

    The question that springs to my mind around this is…..Is this government so desperate for cash they need to rearrange the ownership of Kiwibank to get their hands on $300 million?
    Worrying if things are that bad
    • RedBaronCV 13.1

      7 April 2016 at 8:15 pm

      I’m sure they are that bad – govt borrowing is huge so coupled with a desire to leave the cupboard bare of anything for any incoming non Nact govt – this ticks both the boxes.
      But there are options – the next government could levy a one off super tax rate on earnings over say $1m and also levy at the same rate both the income and assets on all those offshore trusts and if they don’t pay then make a grab for the assets that they own whoopee…
14. pat 14

    7 April 2016 at 8:20 pm

    Well it certainly doesn’t tick the box of the reason given…..to enable Kiwibank to grow…..and then they pinch most of the capital raised.
    Unless of course both the ACC and Cullen funds wish to divest from say oil and gas ( and connected) investments overseas and move into an investment that is unlikely to be stranded in the near future….and one of the few with the potential scale in the NZ market.
15. Smilin 15

    7 April 2016 at 9:22 pm

    well “bottom line Bill” has certainly got things working well with Cullen
    Here we go again anything but the fact that when Douglas did the sellout of the NZ trading banks to Aust that even Jim’s brain wave would fail in the hands of the right wing .
    Cut and run finance policies all demanded by people like Bobbity bob Jones so that their bank fees and investments would work better with their Kiwi owned banks head officed in Oz
    All this at the time set the stage that in the future it would be impossible for an NZ owned bank to ever be the govts bank again why purely because one bank like Kiwibank would never be able to acquire the capital that the NZ banks had from the history of banking deposits since the country began
    Numbers do lie and this is just another lot of cock from the govt
    Amazing as Roger Douglas was to completely hood wink NZ with his financial wizardry his legacy is still making banking in the shaky isles as stable a s liquefaction in CHCH and Bill and Sir Michael are carrying on the the great lie as laid down by Sir Roger the rogerer of NZ and his back room boy in the Banker wanker Trust who creamed god knows how much out of this country sending it sky high to fuckin no where
    And now the present con men are going to dissipate the entity of Kiwibank another attack of austerity on the left it just never ends
16. TC 16

    7 April 2016 at 10:27 pm

    Gawd I dooo love a rigged game…..its sooo predictable.
17. SPC 17

    7 April 2016 at 11:35 pm

    Two men made this deal.

    Neither wanted Kiwibank (no wonder people suspect them of setting it up for a future sale too unpopular to make at present) and English did not want the NZSF (and has not put one dollar into it).

    This scheme does not put one dollar into Kiwibank, but transfers ownership of it in ways that places

    1. $300M in a dividend to the government (and downgrades Kiwibanks credit rating – ending its chances of becoming a bank capable of competing for funds on the international market)
    2. 25% of the shares to NZSF at below market value – the only “real” ‘transfer of value into Cullen’s Fund of the National term in office (now over 7 years).
18. mpledger 18

    8 April 2016 at 9:43 am

    The only way ACC and the Cullen fund can make any sort of money out of this is when they sell – and you can bet the govt won’t buy it – they’ll say they don’t have the money. And the Cullen fund is going to have to sell sometime because of the baby boomers coming up for retirement.

    It’s a farce.

    Luckily, I believe in karma.

Links to post

1. The Mendacities of Mr Key # 16: The sale of Kiwibank eight years in the planning? | Frankly Speaking...: posted on 11 April 2016 at 5:27 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS