John MacDonald: Which assets to sell? What about these ones?

Generally speaking, when something isn’t making you any money, you try to get rid of it.

That’s in business, especially. And it looks like that’s the approach National might want to take with state assets too.

Christopher Luxon says he’s open to it, and I am too. To a point. And maybe not in the way Christopher Luxon is thinking.

The Prime Minister is saying that state asset sales are not on the agenda this term - but he’s willing to take it to the next election.

But let’s be honest, he’s more than just open to it. Especially when you hear him saying things about “recycling” assets making good sense if you’re not getting an adequate return on your capital.

But when I say I’m open to the Government selling-off some of its assets —or our assets— the approach I would want to see taken is a bit different from what most people think of when they hear talk about governments selling assets.

Anyone who opposes selling public assets —and these can be assets that are owned by the government but also owned by other outfits like local councils— argue that once something is sold you can’t get it back.

Which I get. It’s like finding yourself in a bit of financial strife and selling an old heirloom or something precious to you because you need the money. And then, down the track, you really regret it. Once something’s gone, it’s gone.

Which is how some people will be feeling about the PM saying that state asset sales are not on the agenda this term - but he’s open to it and willing to take it to the next election.

And he seems to be up for asset sale - like his predecessor, Sir John Key, who said on Newstalk ZB this morning that, if he needed urgent health care today, he wouldn't give two hoots about who owned the bricks and mortar.

And maybe that’s an easy thing for someone with plenty of money behind them to say.

But if you put that aside, he’s actually spot on. If something happened to you today, all you would care about is getting the treatment you needed.

And, if the government is going to down the track of selling assets, this is what it should focus on.

It should be trying to find buyers for all of our hospital buildings. It should be trying to find buyers for all of our state school buildings.

It should be selling all of the things that actually suck money away from the key public services that are provided inside those buildings.

Because the challenge when it comes to selling anything, is finding buyers.

The Christchurch City Council discovered that a few years back when it wanted to sell City Care because it wasn’t making it any money.

But I bet that if we put all of our hospitals and schools up for sale —I’m talking here about the bricks and mortar— I reckon the Government would have no problem finding buyers.

As former Labour and ACT party politician Richard Prebble puts it in the NZ Herald today: "If we want to be a first world country, then are we making the best use of the Government’s half a trillion dollars plus worth of assets?”

And I would argue that owning the bricks and mortar that Sir John Key talked about isn’t the best use of government capital. Owning hospital buildings isn't, nor is owning school buildings.

Because who cares who owns the buildings?

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from newstalk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
You know, generally speaking, I reckon, well, generally speaking, when
something isn't making you any money, you tried to get
rid of a day if you can. That's in business especially,
and it looks like that's the approach national might want
to take with state assets as well. Christopher Luxen, he
says he's open to it, and I am too, but

(00:37):
to a point. So the Prime Minister is saying that
asset sales are not on the agenda this term, so
we get all that, but he's willing to take it
to the next election to see what we think of it,
what the voters think of it. But let's be honest,
is more than just open to it, especially when you
hear him saying things like he was yesterday about quote

(00:59):
recycling assets making good sense if you're not getting an
adequate return on your capital. But when I say I'm
opening to the government selling off some of its assets,
so yes, correction, some of our assets. When I say that,
I reckon that the approach that I would want to
see taken is a bit different from what most people

(01:22):
think of when they here talk about governments selling assets.
It might even be different from what the government's thinking.
I'll get to that. But the big risk with all
of this is whether selling assets is the right move
to try and balance the books. Now, anyone who opposes
selling public assets, and these can be assets, can't they

(01:44):
that are owned by the government, but also owned by
other outfts like local councils. People who are against who
are dead against sell offs in any way, shape or form.
They argue that once something is sold, you can't get
it back, which I get. It's like finding yourself in
a bit of financial strife, and you what do you
do when you look around. You sell an old heirloom

(02:07):
or something precious to you because you need the money,
and then down the track you might really regret it
because you know, once something's gone, it's gone, which is
how some people will be feeling today. You might be
feeling this way yourself. With the Prime Minister saying that
state asset sales not on the agenda this term, but
he's open to it and willing to take it to
the next election. And let's be honest, he's more than

(02:30):
just open to it. As I say, a sidebar which
you will have heard is he says selling state houses
wouldn't be part of any asset sell off that National
would be involved in, which is a bit of a
departure from what National has done previously with state houses.
But I think we can say that generally Luxeon is

(02:51):
up for asset sales like his predecessors. Sir John Key
was who was talking to Mike this morning, and have
listened to this. He said something about government ownership of
hospitals that I thought was particularly interesting.

Speaker 3 (03:05):
Have listen needed the major health procedure this afternoon. Frankly,
I don't care who owns that. I don't care it's
the private sector. I don't cure it's a public sector.
I tell what I care about the surgeons and medical
professionals that are around me, right, and that they have
the drugs that I need for that procedure. That's what

(03:25):
I care about. What the actual ownership of the bricks
and water.

Speaker 2 (03:28):
Now you might say, oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's
easy with someone who's got plenty of money to say,
But put that aside, all right, Just put that aside,
and I reckon john Key is spot on, its spot on,
because if something happened to you today, all you would
care about is getting the treatment you needed. You wouldn't

(03:52):
give two hoots about who owned the building that you
were taken to in an ambulance or whatever. And I
know that if something happened to me today, hope it doesn't,
but I know if something did happen I aimed up
in the hospital, I wouldn't care who who owned the building.
Which is why I reckon that if the government is

(04:13):
going to go down the track of selling assets, this
is what it should focus on. It should be trying
to find buyers for all of our hospital buildings. It
should be trying to find buyers for all of our
state school buildings. Essentially, it should be selling off all
of the things that actually suck money away from the

(04:35):
key public services that are provided inside those buildings that
suck money away from the health system, the hospital system.
And the challenge too when it comes to selling anything
as finding buyers. I mean, the Christiant City Council discovered
that a few years back, didn't it when it wanted
to sell city Care because it wasn't making any money.

(04:56):
But I bet I'll bet you that if we put
all of our hospitals and schools up for sale, the buildings,
the bricks and mortar, the government would have no problem
finding buyers. As former Labor and At Party politician Richard
Richard Prebble puts it in The Herald Today, he says, quote,
we need to get past the squeamishness about privatization and

(05:19):
ask a simple question. He says, if we want to
be a first world country, then are we making the
best use of the government's half a trillion dollars plus
worth of assets?

Speaker 3 (05:30):
That's the question.

Speaker 2 (05:31):
And I would argue, and I would answer that owning
the bricks and mortar that Sir John Key talked about
there isn't the best use of that money. Isn't the
best use of government capital. Owning hospital buildings certainly not
the best use of government capital. Only owning school buildings

(05:52):
certainly not the best use of government capital. Because it
comes down to this, who cares who owns the buildings.
I don't care whether it's the government or someone else.

Speaker 1 (06:03):
For more from Canterbory Mornings with John McDonald, Listen to
news Talks at be Christchurch from nine am weekdays, or
follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.