THE FACTS
- Air New Zealand reported a $59 million pre-tax loss and a $40 million bottom-line loss for the six months to December.
- Winston Peters opposes selling the airline, citing its importance to tourism and jobs, while David Seymour advocates for its sale.
- Air NZ chief executive Nikhil Ravishankar announced a strategic “reset” supported by Airports Association chief executive Billie Moore.
To sell or not to sell? That is the question.
As Air New Zealand reported a $59 million pre-tax loss and a $40m bottom-line loss for the six months to December, the political sparring began and, sadly but perhaps predictably, added a zero net benefit to the sum of public knowledge.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, who believes the airline should be enshrined in a future fund investment, lobbed “lunacy” into the ring, saying that advocating divestment of the national carrier is “blind ideology”.
He is, of course, referring to the late-1980s decision by the Labour Government of the day to sell off 15 of Aotearoa New Zealand’s public assets, including the New Zealand Railways and Air New Zealand.
Back in 2001, the Labour Finance Minister at the time, Sir Michael Cullen, announced that the Government would take a stake of more than 83% in the company and throw in $885m to save the airline, funded by the taxpayer.
The rationale was that Air New Zealand was vital to the country’s tourism industry and provided thousands of jobs for New Zealanders.
Meanwhile Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour says sell, sell, sell. This attitude holds that if Air New Zealand is not performing it must be punished, ignoring the fact that the only people who may ultimately be punished by selling the airline are the consumers and the nearly 12,000 Air New Zealand employees.
When Seymour says “woke” in the context of Air New Zealand, he is referring to electric plane research, climate change and “paper cups in the Koru Lounge”.
There is nothing “woke” about climate change, it is a fact. Perhaps investing in electric planes looks like a noble “nice-to-have” right now, but the airline’s management should be congratulated, not mocked, for trying to address a serious issue in which New Zealanders are highly invested.
Air New Zealand chief executive Nikhil Ravishankar has announced a strategic “reset”, which has the support of Airports Association chief executive Billie Moore.
“Our interests are in them succeeding,” she told the Herald.
It has been discussed for some time whether the Government should be both regulator and majority shareholder. These are valid questions. But it’s a complex business. Airlines are vulnerable to the turbulence of global markets, a weak New Zealand dollar, higher fuel costs, pandemics and domestic consumer demand.
When there is engine trouble, you first try to land and look to all possible opportunities to mitigate against disaster. You don’t nosedive into the abyss and say, “serves you right, we’re bailing on you all”.
In order to look forward, we need to look back. To learn from the lessons of the past. New Zealand may not have a particularly impressive track record in public infrastructure or asset investment, but we can be better – just look at the ambitious CRL, which will arguably change the game and the lives of commuters, communities and those in small businesses.
Air New Zealand is not simply a warm fuzzy, a symbolic brand, an expendable nice-to-have. It is a national carrier of which we can be justifiably proud. One worth investing in.
It can and must do better, but one thing we know from looking back is that once something is gone, it’s gone forever.