Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It is a Monday sport with Jason Pine and Andrews
several meantime, the prime ministers in the studio with us.
Good to see you, Good see you too, Mike. Now
the methane targets. Were you not there yesterday behind the
wooden stump on the farm because you were fearful that
the Greens would come after you? So you see Todd
and co out.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
No, there was a lot of people involved in that.
We had good industry support as well, and obviously we've
got ministers from all the different political parties that have
got agricultural responsibilities there as well. But look, I'm really
pleased with that decision. That's something we've been working on
for a while. We said in the campaign as national
that we would go off and look at that. It's
appropriate that we do. Here's the deal. We are the
most carbon efficient farmers in the world. We are the
(00:36):
most productive farmers in the world, and the previous model
of just sending that production off shore just makes greenhouse
gas emissions worse and makes kiis poor. And I think
we've got to a very very sensible practical place.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Okay, does it affect us in a NUA shape or form,
with the trade agreements we've already signed that.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
No, no, no, this is us saying, look, we're on
track for net zero twenty fifty if that reports, so
we could do it anywhere up to six years early.
But with a the separate target, which was about methane,
which was when the legislation was created. We've always said
we'd review that based off the science that we see.
Lots of different advice, and we've got to a place
a range of fourteen to twenty four percent reduction over
(01:11):
the twenty seventeen levels by twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (01:13):
Do you think this comes out? Do you think people
then understand because of what the farmer's been arguing the
whole time. Methane is different. It's not just in that
whole big basket of Paris. Let's save the world. Methane
is a different gas. Yeah, we need to understand.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
But what's actually been happening is the success of New
Zealand farming over one hundred and fifty years. You know,
we shouldn't be as successful as we are in the world,
but we are because our guys keep adopting a whole
hepotechnology and innovation, and it's the same on this they've
actually been making big improvements on breeding and genetics. On
breeding they've been making you know, there's actually other innovation
that's coming that's going to be here in the next
(01:46):
year or two that's going to make a big difference
to methane emission, so you can actually lower your emissions
and increase productivity I believe for New Zealand farming going
forward from here.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
Is the attention within the coalition at the moment over
Paris in general. That will play out next you're in
the election campaign.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
Well, parties may have their own views on it, but
as you're saying, the government position, which is all three
parties in coalition have said no, no it. This makes
sense for us to stay in Paris because you know,
otherwise it's countries that we compete with in large multinationals
kicking our products out and that's not something we're up for.
It just makes us poorous. So I think everyone understands that.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
But we'll act, for example, campaign on getting out of it,
because they've already stated they want to get out of it.
So how badly are you holding them in here just
for them to wait to twenty twenty six?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Yeah? No, I mean, I mean they may well form
their own party positions and I'll take that to the
next I don't know what they'll do, to be honest,
I'm just saying from a national point of view, and
more importantly from a coalition government point of view, coming
out of Paris would be really dumb for us. It
would hurt us and that's not They would make key
Is poor and that's not good. So I'm not punishing
our farm as we genuinely are going to meet those
You know, We're in Paris for a reason, which is
(02:50):
there's four countries that aren't currently and it helps us
a lot set our products.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Is there any point in asking you about the local
body elections given they were an a mitigated disaster. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Turn out was pretty low, wasn't it, And I think
you know what you saw there was. I think there's
two bits to it. One is, candidates have to be
compelling and they have to have to excite voters to
actually have a vision of what they wanted to achieve
and what they want to do. The second thing is
that New Zealanders, you know, the voters themselves. I mean,
if you don't vote, then you can't complain, and you know,
rates of Gobon up twelve point seven percent. So I mean,
(03:21):
if you feel strongly about an issue like that where
you need to show up and actually vote and participate.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
But no one's doing anything about this, are they Between
now and the next local body elections.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
No one's going to change anything. Now we've got a system.
It's as simple as register and vote. You know, people
say to me, Chris, can you go off and do
computerized voting. We can look at a whole bunch of things.
Local government zone should definitely look at all of that.
But the upshot is, look, we've got a system that works.
Just go to get out and do it.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
Do you read anything into the trend? Broadly speaking, there's
a move to the right, and broadly speaking, those who
whacked big rates on lost.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Yeah, well I think that's really important. I mean, you know,
when you don't have council's focus on the basis as
we've talked about, and those that ran up massive rate increases,
I saw that too, that have been punished. I think
that's you know, that's a good thing. I mean, if
you care about your rates, then you care about what's
going on in your city, you should you should vote,
and that's what's happened.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
Okay, Chorus, how real How realistic are you about this?
Speaker 2 (04:11):
Yeah, I'm quite excited by it because it actually frees
up one point one billion dollars that we get to
invest elsewhere in the economy. And you know, I saw
a labor come out and say, oh, it's an asset
sale and I thought jee that. You know, they're economically
illiterate and done as a bag of Ham's frankly, because
if you can't distinguish the difference between debt and equity,
which is a pretty basic thing. This is a company
that's on the New Zealand Stock Exchange. We don't own
(04:31):
any of it. It's just that we loan the money
while we were actually rolling out ultra fast broadband that's
now finished. We can sell that debt security to somebody
else who gets repaid by Chorus and one point them
we go use one point one billion dollars of that.
So you're going to do it, well, I mean i'd
like us to. We're exploring it see whether we've got
to find someone who can actually want to be full
(04:52):
of people. But I think it's a really good thing
in sensible right.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
So are you going to do it? And when you're
going to do We're trying to we're trying to do it. Okay,
so it's on, we're set to go put on a
quarterly plan so much. Well, I don't even give you those,
So as soon as you can find somebody to take that,
you'll take it. And it's it's money, it's yeah. Look,
I think it's a really sensible brain. And the other
question for me is then, well, well, it's basically what's
(05:15):
called balance sheet laziness, and you've got to make sure
that you're using you know that we haven't got lazy
balance sheets across the other government, cross government. The question
is is there other similar things? The question so, are
you differentiating between the fact that's debt versus selling. You're
fifty percent of Near New Zealand, for example.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
Yeah, doing asset sales this term, But.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Are you going to be campaigning on asset sales?
Speaker 2 (05:41):
Well, we haven't made a decision yet. No, we haven't
made a decision. We've got it, well, a long way
to go for the elext money two thirds of the
way through the term, Mike, so we've got plenty of
time to think about it.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Are you favored or leaning towards the idea that you
could campaign on asset sales.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Oh, look, haven't haven't really, we haven't discussed it. We've
got so much focus, you know. It must be like
every day we go into that joint and the stuff
to sort out and clean up. That's been the last
set of thinking about.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
So you've thought about chorus, but you haven't thought about
the possibility because you've got a moment ago. You're excited
about your one point something, But I am superod why
aren't you excited about the billions you could get from
I'm just looking at the balance sheets of Crown entities
and just saying that there must be you know, are
we using it a balance sheet as efficiently as it
possibly can be, or have we got cash tied up
that can actually be released to do other things?
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Okay, what were you spended on the heap of stuff?
We've got a massi amount of infrastructure we've got to
get built. We've got a huge amount of roads to
get delivered. There'll be one place to think about. Wouldn't
at all? Or we might a little bit of debt
but it did, But actually probably you know, the capital
investment would be something that would be really productive use
for that money.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
The advertising bill. Most people won't know what happened to here,
but the house ran out of time or got closed
down the other night. So the bill was up on
advertising on Sundays for radio and stuff like that, and
you guys ran out of time now. But it's not
the most important thing in the world. But what it
does tell me and remind me of is what I
tell you every time you come to the studio is
open the place up more often and actually get some
(07:09):
business done, and then you wouldn't run out of time
and close it down.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Says the man that's on holiday for what first of
November to like first of April is't loo or something.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
I'm not running the country, but yeah, I mean, do
you know does the Parliament need to be more open
to do more stuff?
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Well, I just say we have put the Parliament to
what's called urgency a lot, probably used it the most
since the early eighties because we've got a lot of
stuff to get done. On that one that was a
bit weird and as to what actually happened there around
proxy votes and that were recognized in the first reading
and the second reading, but they're not their labor appealed.
And then it was the votes to third until Tuesday,
so when the next sitting day is. But the weird
(07:44):
thing about that one was Labor actually supports that bill
and then actually challenged it and then delay the vote
on that, which was a bit silly.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
So okay, but it will pass though, Yeah, we'll pass
on Tuesday. Yeah, Fontira and Peters does Peter, I know
you're in a fan of in favor of von Tira
selling their commercial But Peter's makes a lot reasonable point,
doesn't he.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Nla, I mean, I just don't think farmers need politicians
telling them what to do. They had a guts full
of that that's happened over the last six years. Yep.
I've got a different view, which is that having worked
in a big consumer goods company for eighteen years, the
margins on food service and ingredients and selling business to
business are so much greater than business to consumer and
selling consumer brands around the world.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
How Comela like Tarlers don't see it that way.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
Well, that could the same as call businesses and consumer business.
But what Fonterras discovered and why Fonterra is doing incredibly well,
and Myles Harrald deserves tremendous credit and that team for
refocusing that company after it lost focus. I felt for
a decade or so is actually on saying actually we
can sell ambient whipping cream that is devised and our
research and development labs is unique and can be stored
(08:45):
at ambient temperatures and sent off to thousands, if not
millions of Korean bakers, and that is a much better
business that generates better margins and returns that goes back
to the farmer shaholder. So I just have a different
view on that. I just think that's a really smart
move in a very good use of capital and an investment.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Did you say, well, how many times did you say
to Lawrence Wong, I really wish I was like.
Speaker 2 (09:06):
You Wi Lawrence?
Speaker 1 (09:07):
How many times did you say, I wish we were
more like Singapore?
Speaker 2 (09:11):
Well? I love Singapore. I must have been in my
early twenties and I read like leekon news Singapore story
third World to first World. But we had a great
three and a half hour private dinner actually at home,
just the two of us and at your place in
my house. Yeah, and it was catering in for that. Yeah.
Tony A still very kindly came by and at a time. Yeah,
he's a top man. He does a great job. So
(09:32):
it was just no security guys. It was just the
two of us and now and Tony and it was great.
And yeah, like Singapore is a fantastic example of what's
achievable when you focus on management. But you know, he
did say to me, he said that he goes to
Parliament once or twice a month, and I thought, yeah,
that's he run the country.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
As a result, did Tony clean up the kitchen? Affoods?
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Between Tony and myself, we cleaned it up beautifully and
is due back tomorrow, so hopefully she'll be here. Well
what did Lawrence do? Did he wait in the lounge
while you clean? Think? I read some plates?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Six second us Good, it's good to see how diplomacy's done.
Nice to see you appreciated the Prime Minister Christopher Lexem.
For more from the My Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks it'd be from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.