Capital Markets: Time for Prospectus NZ? (NZ Herald)

Fran O’Sullivan and Tim McCready

New Zealand is in a sweet spot.

Surely it’s time for our sharpest brains to come up with a major campaign to spruik New Zealand as an investment destination and go hard on capital markets?

“I just think the genie is out of the bottle with New Zealand,” says Nicholas Ross, country head for UBS New Zealand. “People are just going to keep coming and coming and coming.”

“If there was ever a time to be bold and to borrow a bit more this is it,” he adds. “Markets are in very good shape, they are very receptive to good proposals and interest rates are very low.”

It is a stance shared by a growing number of senior NZ capital markets players and business leaders.

New Zealand arguably remains behind the pace when it comes to applying financial leverage to fully fund the growing infrastructure gap sparked by rocketing net migration.

A Government spooked by a series of major earthquakes is wary of accruing too much debt in case it needs to use its balance sheet in the event of another costly natural disaster or recession. But this appears short-sighted when Trump’s America and Brexit have affected international perceptions and this country is increasingly viewed as a safe haven for people and capital.

Auckland Chamber of Commerce CEO Michael Barnett points out there are many options for funding the city’s growth.

But they all require capital.

Commonwealth Bank’s Andrew Woodward says the NZ debt market has shown it has the capacity to complete larger project finance transactions.

Woodward – who is general manager of CBA’s NZ operations – points to Transmission Gully and the Puhoi-to-Warkworth projects, which attracted support from domestic and offshore banks and investors and competitive outcomes for the NZ Government.

He says the continued success of this style of transaction – as well as funding of significant investment by the likes of Auckland Council and Auckland Airport – will continue to rely on domestic and increasingly international debt markets supporting growth projects, with both having targeted international debt markets to meet their growing funding requirements this year.

Says Woodward: “To aid the further development of the NZ debt market there continues to be a strong role for Government in outlining a clear pipeline of projects (across a range of asset classes including toll roads, prisons, hospitals, and rail projects), so foreign capital keeps New Zealand on the radar, as well as ensuring legislation around areas such as interest withholding tax are competitive versus other jurisdictions, and encourage investment in New Zealand.

“While the domestic debt market can meet requirements up to a certain capacity, foreign capital is expected to play an increasing role to meet the planned infrastructure spend.”
Kiwis who have collectively saved more than $40 billion in KiwiSaver – an average of just under $15,000 per person – might also question whether investment allocations are structured to deliver sufficient funding for NZ growth (and the needs of savers).

Australian research firm Strategic Insight has released figures showing total KiwiSaver balances hit $40.651 billion at the end of March; up from $38.416b at the end of December.

With KiwiSaver poised to turn 10 this year, it is worth asking whether more avenues for investment should be provided onshore.

In its report, World awash with Money, Bain & Company looked at capital trends through to 2020.

The consultancy firm predicted that for the balance of the decade, markets will generally continue to grapple with an environment of “super-abundance”.

It says there has been a power shift from the owners of capital to the growers of good ideas. “In this environment, investors’ success will be determined less by how much money they command than by their ability to spot an investment’s true creation potential and act on it nimbly.

Those that can react with speed and adaptability will be best able to identify the winners, steer clear of bubbles and generate superior returns.”

There is an abundance of innovation in New Zealand. Time for that Kiwi prospectus to fund our growth and our ideas.

Capital Markets: Venturing closer to maturity (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Richard Dellabarca, chief executive of the NZ Venture Investment Fund, has completed a strategic review of the industry and provided growth options to Government, reports Tim McCready
Last year, then Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce announced a review of New Zealand Venture Investment Fund’s structure, reiterating the Government’s ambition for the fund to become self-sustaining.

Soon after the announcement, Richard Dellabarca was appointed chief executive of NZVIF in mid-2016 — a move that indicated the industry was maturing.

Dellabarca, an investment banker, had spent 14 years offshore in a variety of leadership roles in venture-backed companies, capital markets, financial services and technology-related opportunities.

He brings a private sector investment perspective, but given his experience as an entrepreneur he understands what is required to build globally scalable companies.

“Really good Venture Capital funds (VCs) are looking to build businesses. Investment is an important skill to have, but their greatest skill is in building companies,” he says.

“It helps to have gone through the journey of building a global company, or a company with global aspirations, in order to understand what is needed.”

When Dellabarca joined NZVIF, he was given a blank piece of paper and the mandate to go away and undertake an independent strategic review. He has spent the last year speaking with stakeholders — around 140 organisations and 230 individuals.

Dellabarca says he is encouraged with the significant amount of investable opportunities in New Zealand, noting that founders and teams tend to be aspirational and motivated, and companies aim to be global from day one.

The review noted a growing amount of angel investment — $69 million in the last year, and more than $400 million since figures have been tracked — in addition to the significant investment into universities and Crown Research Institutes.

There is money available in New Zealand to fund proof-of-concept in early stage companies.

But a shortage of funds was identified for opportunities requiring $5-20 million in early stage growth capital.

In addition, Dellabarca noted that in the Silicon Valley or the UK, “you generally see funds syndicating with two or three investors when raising Series A & B investment.

“Yet over here, we have only Movac and Global from Day One (GD1) investing locally in growth capital, severely limiting the opportunity to syndicate investments or fully fund early stage growth companies through to maturity — and ultimately a successful realisation of the investment.”

Although eight Venture Capital funds were originally established in New Zealand, the average fund size was only NZ$45 million compared with a global average of approximately US$300 million.

Dellabarca explains there is a good reason for global fund sizes given the amount of money a company generally requires through to an investment realisation.

“They will tend to invest in, say, 15-18 companies at $5-10 million each, and then keep money aside for further follow-on investment in companies that are succeeding.

“This allows for better funds management practice, managing downside while optimising on upside opportunities,” he says.

“These historic sub-scale New Zealand funds tended to invest in a range of companies, but then either didn’t have capacity to fund them through to success and, therefore under-capitalised them, or had later stage investors dilute them down when they couldn’t follow on with the investment.

“The consequence was that many of these funds didn’t generate appropriate returns for their investors,” Dellabarca says.

While offshore corporates and financial institutions have had an interest in allocating money into New Zealand technology innovation, they have not been able to find a platform to put the money in.

As many of these institutions manage multibillion-dollar funds, the smallest investment they are willing to make is $50-$100 million.

“With an average fund size of $45 million, their mandate will often preclude them from being more than 10-20 per cent of a fund,” says Dellabarca.

“By definition you need a $300 million to $400 million fund to take these cheques.

“We just haven’t set up a fund of scale to allow foreign investors to come in and access innovation.”

NZVIF have presented a number of options to Economic Development Minister Simon Bridges that aim to make the fund self-sustainable.

Although Dellabarca is unable to divulge the details on those options, he says the fund-of-funds model with its hefty fees on fees structure is no longer viable.

The results of the strategic review provide a clue that early stage expansion capital for growth companies is New Zealand’s choke point, and is a gap NZVIF would like to address if a model that works can be established.

“There is an unmet need. You could argue about the specific number but the current deal flow suggests an annual demand of $200-$300 million,” says Dellabarca.

“If you assume our current VCs invest over five years, holding back 30 per cent for follow-on investment (the traditional venture capital investing model), then you have approximately $20-$25 million invested per year, versus a demand of up to $300 million per year.

“But whatever the number is, it is substantially larger than available capital. The aspirational goal is to have that need met in some way or another.”

Considering the future, Dellabarca says that he would like to see more money in the angel space. NZVIF is currently the second largest angel investor in New Zealand, and he hopes that in time it won’t be needed.

He has the same goal for the venture capital space.

“Hopefully in 15 years we won’t need a NZVIF in any guise, and instead there will be several self-sustaining funds of scale,” he says.

“We don’t have government intervention in private equity.

“You would hope that ultimately the same will happen in the venture capital space.”

Power of NZVIF?
The NZ Venture Investment Fund (NZVIF) was established by the Labour Government in 2002 to build a vibrant early stage investment market in New Zealand by investing alongside private venture capital funds into high-growth companies.

NZVIF currently has $245 million of funds under management which it invests through two vehicles:

  1. a $195 million venture capital fund of funds, partnering with private New Zealand venture capital funds to support the development of innovative companies from start-up through to growth (investing on a two-to-one basis).
  2. a $50 million Seed Co-Investment Fund (SCIF) established in 2005 to encourage angel investment and fill the investment gap for entrepreneurs needing capital to get their business underway (investing on a one-to-one basis).

Since its inception, NZVIF has formed 27 investment partners (16 angel and 11 venture capital partners) and invested in a portfolio of 236 companies.

NZVIF has helped stimulate $2.2 billion in leveraged capital, $1.2 billion in attracted overseas capital, employment of 6076 FTEs and $174 million in taxes.

China Business: Alibaba offers sweet deals (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready chats with Alibaba’s Australia and New Zealand director of business development John O’Loghlen about the new regional office, the work being done with New Zealand businesses, and the future of online shopping.

Moving on from the rules of the WTO and global trade will allow small businesses and developing nations to tell their stories and trade together effectively using e-commerce.

Alibaba last month opened an Australian and New Zealand office in Melbourne, demonstrating the Chinese e-commerce giant’s ambition to expand its global footprint.

“Although it is headquartered in Melbourne, New Zealand is equally important,” said John O’Loghlen, Director of Business Development – Australia and New Zealand at Alibaba Group. “The leadership team in Hangzhou look at both markets together.”

Alibaba also recently appointed Pier Smulders as Director of Business Development in New Zealand, a dedicated in-market resource and experienced client service professional for Alibaba’s key accounts and opportunities in the SME space.

At the Melbourne opening, Alibaba founder Jack Ma acknowledged Australia and New Zealand’s clean environment provides a unique selling point for its businesses and will be a “goldmine” for the region’s economy over the next 15 years.

“In the past 30 years through a lack of experience in China we have a terrible polluted environment. There’s a lot we should have learned from Australia and New Zealand,” he said. With a local office and expert team, Alibaba will help Australian and New Zealand businesses share their world-famous products with billions of customers around the world.

“Whether a large company with existing links to China, or a mum-and-dad run exporter operating out of a garage, Alibaba is here to make it easy to do business,” he said.

The opening of the Australasian office comes after a strategic alliance was established between Alibaba and the New Zealand Government last year. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE) formalised discussions for strengthening trade between China and New Zealand, with an aim to foster greater trade opportunities for businesses seeking to enter the Chinese consumer market.

At the time of signing, NZTE chief executive Peter Chrisp said: “New Zealand businesses are already using Alibaba’s channels to sell a wide range of products including dairy, meat, seafood, fruit, wine, beverage, cereal, skincare and health supplements. By providing dedicated services for New Zealand products, this new arrangement offers significant opportunities for New Zealand businesses to reach more consumers as well as advocating New Zealand’s reputation as a place of open spaces, open hearts and open minds.”

Since the MOU was signed, Alibaba and NZTE have run workshops across New Zealand, helping exporters to gain insights into doing business with China and Chinese consumers, evaluate their business models and provide education about Alibaba’s various platforms.

Last September, NZTE and New Zealand Winegrowers established a Wine Pavilion on Tmall, dedicated to the sale of about 100 different New Zealand wines, representing all key wine regions and wine varietals.

NZTE’s Trade Commissioner in Shanghai, Damon Paling, says that wine traffic has been growing through organic and paid advertising, with the conversion rate consistent with market expectations at around two per cent, and an average basket value around NZ$120.

In addition to wine, Paling says that Alibaba platforms Tmall and Taobao are “seeing good sales of various consumer dairy products, fruits, and small categories such as manuka honey, wine, breakfast cereals, and snack bars.”

Although New Zealand and Australia is perceived as a regional “sweet spot,” O’Loghlen said it is important for businesses to appreciate that companies in Switzerland, Japan, America, South America and Britain are all looking towards China too.

“There are a lot of great brands around the world. Many countries make good milk, honey, and merino sweaters.

“In order to be successful, you not only need the best-in-class product in New Zealand and Australia, but it has to stand on its own two feet globally.”

Alibaba is spending a lot of time helping clients understand that it is important to tell their own brand story effectively, while at the same time leverage the unique advantage and narrative that comes from being a New Zealand business.

While there are a huge number of opportunities in the region, O’Loghlen said one of the most significant areas of focus over the next three-to-five years would be produce and protein.

“Seafood, beef, lamb, dairy, and really exotic produce like avocados offer an exciting opportunity.

“The fresh food space is going to be fascinating. We are really excited about fresh milk on top of what has been the first round of extended shelf-life milk into China,” he said.

Alibaba’s platforms will allow businesses to sell direct to consumers, avoiding the layers of distributors that have been a hurdle for New Zealand companies in the past.

O’Loghlen said it is really important to recognise the power of the daigou community – especially in Australia and New Zealand.

Daigou is the Chinese term given to buying items overseas on behalf of others. Products are purchased and brought into China by professional personal shoppers – or bought through online channels – with international students often acting as the intermediary.

This grey market is a multibillion-dollar business, and it can be argued that daigou can help put innovative new products on the radar.

Many New Zealand products already have an unofficial presence in-market because an enterprising Chinese New Zealander found it, liked it, and introduced it to their networks in China, said O’Loghlen.

“Chinese in New Zealand are using their mobile phones to tell the story of the region, disseminating that information back to China in real time.

“My colleagues in Europe and North America do not have an equivalent demographic that we do here [in Australia and New Zealand], in terms of percentage of the Chinese population in the large urban centres,” he said.

Chinese consumers looking to buy something from this region are receiving an accelerated experience of the New Zealand and Australian culture, because – more often than not – they know someone here.

“As Chinese authorities tighten up on the grey channels, companies will need to take hold of their own story from that of the daigou community, moving beyond a commodity phase to a more branded presence,” said O’Loghlen.

“This shift will lead to strong brands telling wonderful stories, and that is where Alibaba can help.”

O’Loghlen has spent considerable time living and working in China, and has noticed the pace of change recently has been more rapid than ever.

“Opportunities are emerging that didn’t exist previously. A lot of new platforms are geared towards small businesses and newer brands.”

Alibaba’s Australasian presence will help to ensure Australian and New Zealand businesses have the information and support necessary to succeed in China and the rest of the world.

“The office here will help businesses in the region understand that the pace of change in China is very different to that of New Zealand – or even Hong Kong or Singapore,” O’Loghlen said.

“I think if you had spoken to people in e-commerce in China several years to premium Kiwi producers

“Now we have a number of bonded warehouse opportunities. For example, Alibaba’s Taobao Global taps into a network of daigou, who ship their products through a bonded warehouse, and are as far away from a grey channel as you can imagine.”

With people in-market, Alibaba can not only help companies in Australia and New Zealand stay on top of the emerging sales channels, but also bridge the cultural chasms and language barriers that come with doing business in China.

Alibaba has made a number of investments in offline department stores over the past 18 months, in a push to merge its online platforms Tmall and Taobao with bricks-and-mortar (offline) shopping.

A surge in mobile internet usage and the growth of big data capabilities is driving this new “omnichannel” shopping experience as a way to better meet consumer demand.

The most recent move by Alibaba was a strategic partnership with Bailian Group, one of China’s largest retail conglomerates with 4700 stores across 200 cities and autonomous regions.

The two companies plan to leverage their respective consumer data to “explore new forms of retail opportunities across each other’s ecosystem,” integrating offline stores, merchandise, logistics, and payment tools to deliver a better overall shopping experience.

By combining membership data, they will be able to introduce technologies including geo-location, facial recognition, and big-data driven sales and customer management systems.

“When we talk with people here, a lot of people ask us if this is like Amazon, or what the analogy is,” said O’Loghlen. “But it is actually something very unique to China.

“These investments in offline allow consumers to experience brands. There will be a blurring of the lines in promotion online and offline.

“People [in China] are used to scanning QR codes or buying things offline and then receiving a promotion online, or vice versa,” he said.

“We have to be able to educate people very quickly about these things, because by the time it gets reported, your competitors may be up and running on the platform.

“It doesn’t require huge marketing dollars. A huge number of these promotions rely on livestreaming, which is the communication channel of choice at the moment in China.”

Marketing via livestreaming maintains a degree of exclusivity for the consumer — if they don’t tune in, they will miss out. Companies can tell their story in a more authentic way, better connecting with buyers and consumers.

“For Singles’ Day (November 11) there were 60,000 live streams between October 21 and November 11 featuring celebrities from China and overseas.”

O’Loghlen explained that if he and I were to have this same conversation in another 12 months, China will likely have moved on from livestreaming – perhaps to augmented reality or virtual reality goggles. That is not as a far-fetched as it seems. Last year the augmented reality game Pokemon Go took the world by storm.

Alibaba’s Buy+ virtual store also made its public debut in July last year at the Taobao Maker Festival in Shanghai. Buy+ – although still in beta – allows consumers to shop and browse products in a virtual environment using a headset with 360-degree views and two hand controllers. Shoppers can even have virtual models showcase apparel and accessories on a catwalk.

Ma has spoken about his aspirations for a frictionless, borderless future for e-commerce. Central to that is the establishment of an “electronic world trade platform” (eWTP), that will use the internet to remove trade barriers and allow all manufacturers and brands – regardless of their size – to have the same opportunity to enter a consumer market.

“Australia and New Zealand are both in the driving seat to take a leadership role in the eWTP rollout,” said O’Loghlen. “Moving on from the rules of the WTO and the rules of global trade will allow small businesses and developing nations to tell their stories and trade together effectively using e-commerce.

“We want to democratise the playing field for trade. A lot of people are really excited by that vision.”

A long lasting connection
Alibaba founder Jack Ma was one of the first foreign business heavyweights to meet with Donald Trump following his election victory.

In contrast to President Trump, Ma is an advocate for global trade, and says the best advertisement for globalisation is the success of one company trading with another, and hiring more people in the process.

By expanding into Australasia, Ma said Alibaba was making it easy for our businesses “to do business anywhere”.

At the opening of Alibaba’s Australasian office, Ma described the region as one he holds a long connection with.

“Australia will always have a special place in my heart and that’s why I’m so pleased to come back to contribute to supporting Australian businesses and create opportunities and jobs in a country that has meant so much for me.”

China’s richest man electrified a luncheon for former Prime Minister John Key in Beijing last April when he thanked New Zealand “for your benefit to the whole planet”.

He revealed then that 20 of Ma’s former colleagues at China’s e-commerce giant loved New Zealand so much they have retired here.

In the 1980s when Ma was 12 years old, he introduced himself to Australian Ken Morley — who was visiting China on a family holiday — in an effort to improve his English.

Ma befriended Morley’s son, who subsequently brought him to Newcastle in Australia on his first international trip.

Ma has said the time spent in Australia when he was young changed his view of China and its relationship with the world. “I am very thankful for Australia and the time I spent there in my youth. The culture, the landscape and most importantly its people had a profound positive impact on my view of the world at that time,” he said.

Last month Ma, who according to Forbes is worth US$28.2 billion and is the second wealthiest man in China, gave A$26.4 million to establish a scholarship at the University of Newcastle.

The Ma & Morley Scholarship Programme will help establish networks between the two countries, as well as provide practical training to equip beneficiaries for leadership in the global environment.

China Business: UniServices goes global from Hangzhou (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Auckland UniServices, the commercial arm of the University of Auckland dedicated to connecting its capabilities to business, investors and the community, has recently established an innovation institute in Hangzhou, the “Silicon Valley of China”.

Hangzhou, capital of Zhejiang province and fourth-largest metropolitan area in China, is just an hour by bullet train from Shanghai and showcases China’s rapid transition from a low-cost manufacturer to technology-focused innovation centre.

E-commerce giant Alibaba was founded in Hangzhou, and companies such as Siemens, Motorola, Nokia and an increasing number of start-ups have set up there.

Dr Lisbeth Jacobs, General Manager International at UniServices, says “Chinese officials in Hangzhou are well aware of the University of Auckland’s success in commercialisation.”

She is responsible for all contract research and services activity outside New Zealand, Australia, and the Pacific.

In 2014, the MIT Skoltech Initiative identified UniServices and Auckland University as one of the top five “emerging leaders in entrepreneurship”, one expected to become a major international powerhouse in the coming decades.

Last year, the university was ranked 27 in a Reuters report on the 75 most innovative universities in Asia, a list that identifies the educational institutions doing the most to advance science, invent new technologies, and help drive the global economy.

“While China is very entrepreneurial and pours a lot of money into innovation, it can still be a struggle to bring new ideas to market,” says Jacobs. “China is a large market that offers a ton of opportunities but at the same time is extremely competitive.

“In order to be successful it is important to have a strong local base,” she says.

“Successful innovation depends on many different factors, but it must be process driven.

“New ventures are typically more likely to succeed when we put experienced people next to young entrepreneurs.”

Jacobs sees Hangzhou as the perfect location for UniServices, matching the type of technology being undertaken at the University.

“Hangzhou has a lot of biotech, e-commerce, logistics, precision manufacturing, pharmaceuticals and nutrition companies, and is attracting top-tier science and technology companies and researchers.”

The Government of the Hangzhou Economic and Technological Development Area (HEDA) helped UniServices find a suitable location for the innovation institute, and assisted with administrative processes and other local requirements.

UniServices will initially use the institute to gain traction in China in several areas where the university’s internationally-recognised expertise is relevant for the Chinese market, including robotics, high value nutrition, light metals research, water, clinical trials and drug development, particularly in oncology.

The University will also look to offer executive education in specific areas, including tailoring their post-graduate qualification in commercialisation and entrepreneurship, for which it is well known internationally.

While UniServices has already had several contracts with Chinese companies, Jacobs says managing them from New Zealand is not always easy.

“On previous projects we have wanted to hire staff close to the project.

“Without a Chinese entity, it is very difficult to do that. Enforcing contract terms and payment has also been challenging at times.”

The institute has been set up as a wholly foreign owned limited liability company under Chinese law.

A local entity and a base in China will make it a lot easier to hire staff, enforce existing contracts and be closer to Chinese customers.

Jacobs explains it is not possible for UniServices to hire generic staff — an engineer might be suitable for a programme in light metals but is not interchangeable to work on a drug development project.

Teams will be built around projects and research entities as is done at UniServices in Auckland.

“Our people will travel more, and as projects and research centres grow we will build teams up locally to expand beyond ad hoc projects,” says Jacobs.

“We will be able to access more work, and ensure any contracting is more effective, efficient, and enforced.

“If UniServices can contract from their own entity in China to another in China — and backed by local government — it is a lot harder to be ignored.”

UniServices has previously had an offshore presence, including a large multi-year programme to introduce an English language foundation programme at Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University in Riyadh, and it has staff in Oman to deliver a schooling improvement project alongside the government.

But establishing an office that will do everything UniServices does from New Zealand, rather than project-based work, is a first for Auckland University.

Jacobs’ vision for the institute is to be actively engaged in contract research, deliver consulting services, spin out companies from the university and incubate start-ups.

“One of UniServices’ criteria for investing in spin-outs is that they have the potential to become global players. It is easier to become global on day one from China than from New Zealand.

“We will be able to offer our start-ups the ability to go global and really test their ideas in an international market.”

Jacobs says the institute aims to bring together people from all facets of the innovation ecosystem to use the facilities and share their experience and expertise with each other.

“It is my hope that the institute will ultimately provide a link between the innovation and commercialisation in New Zealand and China.

“We want to create impact, a vibe, and a hub for innovation,” the UniServices manager says.

Project Auckland: Goff has firm grasp on priorities (NZ Herald)

Despite only being a few weeks into the job, new mayor Phil Goff has a firm grasp on his council’s priorities, report James Penn and Tim McCready
Auckland Mayor Phil Goff acknowledges that virtually everyone agrees upon the city’s challenges.

“Our population went up by 42,600 last year. Our infrastructure in both transport and housing is creaking at the seams,” explains Goff.

“It has not coped, it has been historically underfunded, and the failure of infrastructure to keep up with growth has given us growing traffic congestion leading to gridlock, and a growing housing shortage leading to gross housing unaffordability.”

On one level, the solution appears simple: increase infrastructure spending. The Unitary Plan will ease previous building consent issues, making it theoretically possible for many more houses (or perhaps more accurately, apartments) to be built. But alongside consent as a precondition for construction sits infrastructure — roads, public transport, utilities — to support them.

“Now, I think that analysis is accepted by almost everybody,” says Goff, moving the discussion along to where things are more challenging: “How is local government going to do that?

“It can’t do it through rates, which is the narrow revenue base that statute gives to us. I made a clear promise — cap it at 2.5 per cent — I intend to keep that promise.”

The next obvious pathway to infrastructure spending might be further borrowing. “Cross that one off the list too,” says Goff.

“Standard & Poor’s gives us a very high AA credit rating, and also gives us a constraint that says the debt-to-revenue ratio should not be more than 265 per cent. In next year’s budget, it will be 256 per cent,” he points out, with impressive adroitness for a man only five weeks into the job.

“I have very little freeboard, and I’m not about to give away prudential reputation or my credit rating — that will cost tens of millions, potentially hundreds of millions, of dollars — so I can’t borrow to do that.”

Selling the council’s assets — such as its 22.4 per cent holding in Auckland Airport — is also off the cards. Being a one-off solution, Goff says it doesn’t sufficiently address the revenue side of the equation on an ongoing basis to warrant consideration. Beyond the airport, the council’s asset ledger is rather limited.

Such is the extent of the need for cash, though, that Goff won’t entirely rule out selling the council’s own office building in the city.

“If I had to sell this building and lease it as the price of an arrangement with government — it’s not a strategic asset.

“All in all I’d probably rather keep the building than sell it, but I’m flexible on that.”

Private sector and efficiencies
The mayor stresses that the infrastructure investment effort is not purely a public-sector consideration; he wants business involved as well.

“I think business can be Auckland’s strongest allies in terms of investment spend. I think they’re a critical part of the equation, and their support for the increase in investment in infrastructure will be critical in terms of government’s thinking.”

Goff says he has been doing all he can to send that message to the business community, through discussions with key figures such as Auckland Chamber of Commerce’s Michael Barnett and the EMA’s Kim Campbell in particular.

Council-controlled organisations (CCOs) such as Ateed have been the subject of criticism from the business community in recent times, with Barnett outspoken on the recently-announced new slogan.

Goff is cognisant of the issues around CCOs and how they operate, pointing to Auckland Transport’s light-rail announcement earlier this year as an example. “The sense that I’ve got from being on the campaign trail is that Aucklanders by and large thought that the term ‘council-controlled organisation’ was a misnomer; that we’d set up a group of boards that had taken over the function of council but were not particularly responsive to them.”

How might that be addressed?
The council restructure already imple-mented will see CCOs reporting more directly to council committees, part of an overall effort to make them more responsive to their shareholder — “which is the council and people of Auckland”.

“CCOs will report not only to Finance and Performance, but also to the committees that deal with their particular field. So for example Auckland Transport would be reporting not only to Finance and Performance, but also to Planning because it has jurisdiction over that area of transport.”

One area where Goff wants to bring some of the flavour of central government with him is in utilising the existing accountability mechanisms available to councillors under the Auckland Council Act.

“I want the councillors themselves to be more effective in the manner of a cabinet committee, or even a select committee, in being able to cross-examine and interrogate the council-controlled organisations around their performance.”

The restructuring has also seen the overall number of council committees reduced from 19 to nine. Goff is searching for those sorts of efficiencies across the entire body.

“What I’m looking at is to ensure that we’ve got the best performing council in the country.

“We’ve been through six years where the council has worked out what it means to have one council in place of eight, but I don’t think we’ve done enough in terms of exploring the efficiencies that we might’ve expected.”

He wants to see a reduction in staff numbers — “preferably by attrition” — and a reduction in resource use more broadly.

CCOs are not immune from these efficiencies. Shared services are on the agenda, with functions such as human resources and procurement to be potentially merged and shared among multiple CCOs.

And a more radical restructuring, while not on the agenda, is not ruled out either.

“My first priority is to see that they can work as effectively as possible within the current structure,” explains Goff. “But over time if there seems to me to be a business case for amalgamating I wouldn’t rule that out. But it’s not on the top of my list of priorities, and no definite decision has been made around that.”

Creative funding solutionsGoff’s preferred solutions are a little more creative, and arguably unconventional for a former leader of the Labour Party.

Getting Auckland’s fair share of the Government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund is the first step. While Labour opposed the fund, Goff supported it while still an MP.

The $1 billion fund will provide financial support for projects in the areas of roading, water, wastewater, or stormwater infrastructure. The projects must be intended to support the building of new dwellings and must be from councils in “high-growth urban areas”.

“I would hope to get a significant share of that fund,” says Goff. “Done right, that will enable me to do a whole lot more.”

It’s no surprise that securing Auckland’s slice of the new fund is on the mayor’s agenda. But the idea of a petrol tax might raise a few more eyebrows. “I have been for quite some time a convert to a degree of user-pays in a system,” explains Goff.

“I always thought that was part of the National Party’s philosophy, and I can’t think of strong rational grounds for opposing it, other than — probably — no government wants to be associated with a new form of tax.”

The political ambition of such a plan is not lost on Goff, but he senses potential co-operation from central government in the future.

“I think there is room to negotiate there — it’s maybe about timing.

“The Government has already accepted that a congestion tax would make a lot of sense. A congestion tax is much harder to sell politically. It’s also much more effective because it changes behaviour.

“But nobody thinks that we can get a congestion tax in place short of maybe six or seven years. If you’re going to bring congestion charging in, you would need to set the infrastructure up and expend money on putting in place the admin system, when a fuel tax is simple, cheap, easy to administer, and interim.”

Goff stresses that last word: his fuel tax would be interim. And those raised eyebrows may furrow once the figures are canvassed — which he does, again with impressive acuity.

“Under the Auckland Transport Alignment Project there is a $4 billion deficit over 10 years. We’ve got to find $400 million a year extra to fund even a modest growth in infrastructure that will only slow and not reverse the level of congestion.”

The existing Interim Transport Levy will provide $60 million towards that total. Assuming the Government picks up 50 per cent of the tab, that still leaves a $140 million hole to fill. “A 10 per cent fuel tax probably would produce about $150 million,” argues Goff. “But it would at least make a direct connection between utilisation of the roads and paying for transport infrastructure.”

Another interesting source of revenue mooted is a targeted rate, imposed on large-scale developments. This could be paid off over 20 years, and would provide a revenue source which could in turn enable the council to invest in infrastructure that is required for those developments to actually come to fruition at all — or so the logic goes. “So someone might be paying a targeted rate over 20 years. But if it works, and we get more houses on the market, they’ll be paying a lower capital price than they would’ve if the housing crisis was allowed to continue.”

One important way Goff’s plan functions is that the increase in revenue doesn’t necessarily cover the entire increase in expenditure — it will simply provide the added revenue for council to leverage and take on more debt, while still remaining within the prudential levels demanded by the rating agencies.

Radical incrementalism? The preference for improvements within existing structures seems to be a hallmark of Goff’s thinking as he settles into his new role; a kind of ‘radical incrementalism’.

“It’s not so much that we lack instruments of accountability, but we haven’t properly used the ones that are already in place, and I want to try to work to ensure that that will occur,” he explains.

More stringent enforcement of standing orders is another small change — without overhauling the rules which already exist — that Goff has personally implemented. “A number of councillors have expressed a pleasure that council seems to be operating with a little more discipline and sense of purpose, and that’s what my intention for council will be”

Working with a new government
Goff’s approach to dealing with the Government seems decidedly non-partisan, and entirely unaffected by who sits at the helm. “I will deal with government in good faith, as I will this government or any other government,” says Goff. e”For New Zealand to succeed, Auckland has to succeed.

“I doubt that there’s a parliamentarian — apart from maybe Winston Peters, who has his own particular agenda about provincial areas — that wouldn’t accept that if Auckland fails it will come at a huge cost to the country.”

Goff joked that perhaps with more foresight he could have changed his approach to Twitter — having met with both Key and English the week prior to Key’s announcement, the mayor tweeted a photo with Key but not English. “Maybe I should’ve done it the other way around,” he laughs.

Project Auckland: Housing offer too good to refuse (NZ Herald)

Phil Goff hopes Auckland gets a good share of the Government’s $1b housing fund, writes Tim McCready
Auckland Council has put in an indicative bid for the $1 billion housing infrastructure fund, and Mayor Phil Goff hopes New Zealand’s largest city will gain a significant share of the investment.

“Done right, that will enable us to do a whole lot more,” he says. “We could build 36,000 more houses with the Government’s assistance. That’s an offer I don’t think they would want to refuse.”

The Government is making the fund available to local councils in high growth areas — Christchurch, Queenstown, Tauranga, Hamilton and Auckland — to assist them to establish “substantial new infrastructure investments” that are crucial to increasing housing supply.

At the time of the announcement, then Finance Minister Bill English said the fund will help bring forward the new roads and water infrastructure needed for new housing where financing is a constraint.

“The Government will invest up front to ensure the infrastructure is in place,” he said. “But councils will have to repay the investment or buy back the assets once houses have been built and development contributions paid.”

English acknowledged that infrastructure and its financing is one of the three key constraints to building more houses, alongside land supply and consenting requirements.

“Councils have strict debt limits which means some lack the headroom to invest in infrastructure now and then wait for future development contributions to recover the costs. The fund will help provide more infrastructure sooner by aligning the cost to councils with the timing of revenue from development contributions.”

Building and Housing Minister Dr Nick Smith stressed that the fund is available only for substantial new infrastructure investments that support more new housing, not to replace existing infrastructure. “To access the fund, local councils must outline how many new houses will be built, where they will be built and when they will be available,” he said.

“Ideally, they will have agreements with developers on these issues.”

Auckland has clearly been struggling to deal with the housing crisis. In order to meet the demand over the next 30 years, the council predicts Auckland will need more than 400,000 new residential homes.

Goff agrees with the Government — in order to build more houses, the city must put more money into infrastructure. “I welcomed the housing infrastructure fund when I was still a Labour MP and my party was opposing it,” he says. “That’s because I knew it was important symbolically. The Government knows that with a fast-growing population, it is a cost not a benefit to a council.”

It is that pragmatism that saw many of New Zealand’s top CEOs in the New Zealand Herald’s Mood of the Boardroom survey — held before the mayoral election — agree that Goff’s connectivity to Wellington is a capability that will help things get done.

But will a portion of $1 billion be enough to break the logjam when it comes to housing Aucklanders?

Stephen Selwood, chief executive of Infrastructure New Zealand, thinks that even if Auckland were to get the entire $1 billion, it would only make a small dent in the infrastructure funding deficit. “New Zealand has a legacy of investing too little too late,” he says. “Even though investment has increased significantly in recent years, it is not keeping pace with growth. The reality is that we need to increase investment with urgency and consolidate growth by lead investment in infrastructure.

“This would enable us to develop residential and commercial development at scale integrated with transport investment and make maximum use of limited dollars.”

Selwood says the current plans allow growth everywhere. The infrastructure providers, especially transport providers, can’t keep up, even if they had the budgets to do so.

Goff agrees that even the entire infrastructure fund wouldn’t be enough for Auckland — let alone being spread around all five centres it is being offered to.

The Auckland Transport Alignment Project, presented in September by outgoing Mayor Len Brown and Minister of Transport Simon Bridges, revealed an extra $4 billion must be found over the next decade to fund transportation projects.

“That means we have to find $400 million a year extra to fund even a modest growth in infrastructure that will only slow — and not reverse — the level of congestion,” says Goff.

He is considering alternative funding tools to supplement above and beyond the housing infrastructure fund, one of which is the adoption of a fair level of user-pays for roading infrastructure.

“I have never understood why rates should fund infrastructure, when a significant section of our population who are retired, or who hardly use the roads or public transport, are paying the same as those of us who are working our roads and transport system to death,” he says.

While there are many different mechanisms that could be used to implement a user-pays system, Goff favours a fuel tax for its simplicity to implement. “A 10 per cent fuel tax would probably provide about $150 million per year. I have been a convert to user pays for quite some time — it would make a direct connection between utilisation of the roads and paying for transport infrastructure. It’s simple, cheap, easy to administer — and interim.”

The chart above, produced by Branz and Pacifecon, projects the value of all construction nationally (historic and forecast), and shows the increasing gap between projected investment in residential construction (in blue) vs infrastructure (in green).

 

Project Auckland: Help for city’s homeless people on the way (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Auckland Council will play a co-ordinating role, working with central government, NGOs, and the private sector to eliminate homelessness in the city.

“When I walk up from Britomart, I walk past lots of people sleeping on the street,” says Mayor Phil Goff.

“It’s not simply the perception that’s bad for the city — it’s the reality. Who in their right mind would be sleeping on the pavement if they had some alternative,” he says.

Goff’s policy to help the homeless will be based on the principle of “Housing First” — where priority is given to obtaining stable housing. Once accommodation is provided, wraparound services can be provided to address the issues that lead to homelessness.

“I would argue that by the time you take into account hospitalisation of people of the street, law and order, and imprisonment issues, there is a strong economic case as well as a social case,” he says.

The People’s Project, operating in Hamilton, adopted the Housing First model in 2014. Following the lead of Canada, the United States, Europe and the United Kingdom, it aims to address the public’s concerns about the number of people living on the streets and sleeping rough.

Key organisations — including Hamilton City Council, New Zealand Police, Ministry of Social Development, Child, Youth and Family, Housing New Zealand, Department of Corrections, Waikato District Health Board, Midlands Health, Hamilton Central Business Association, Te Puni Kokiri and the Wise Group — work collaboratively together to end homelessness, rather than manage it.

“I went to visit the People’s Project where they pull it all together,” says Goff. “It just makes sense.

“NGOs have told me the best thing council can do is co-ordinate things. We have 50 different NGOs doing different things. On top of that, government departments are not coming together.

“The People’s Project has had a 93 per cent success rate keeping people in their homes. It works,” Goff says.

Project Auckland: Reducing plastic bag waste first on Goff’s agenda (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Auckland Mayor Phil Goff has expressed a strong desire to see “assets sustained and protected for generations to come”.

In line with this, many of his campaign policies in the lead up to the election were environmental, including protecting Auckland’s marine environment and the Waitemata Harbour, planting a million additional trees in three years, reducing the city’s waste, addressing global warming, and reducing carbon emissions from transport.

The new council may have only been in place for a couple of months, but many of these policies are already underway.

Reducing waste
Goff wants to increase the city’s recycling efforts, implementing initiatives that will work towards an aspirational goal of zero waste to landfill by 2040, set out in the Auckland Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Of the initiatives, one expected to pass fairly quickly is a charge on plastic bags.

“The truth of the matter is that we all know we shouldn’t use them. But we are all lazy,” says Goff.

“Unless we’re pushed, we won’t do it. We could probably cut 500 or 600 million plastic bags a year out of the waste stream in Auckland when we do it.”

Governments around the world have been taking action to ban plastic bags or charge customers for them, beginning with Bangladesh in 2002.

Even some supermarkets in Myanmar are now promoting “No Plastic Bag Day Fridays”, and instead pushing reusable and recycled bags.

California is one of the most recent regions of the world (and the first US state) to ban all retailers from handing out single-use plastic shopping bags at the checkout.

California Proposition 67 — or the “Plastic Bag Ban Veto Referendum” — was included on the ballot in the United States election last month, and passed with 52 per cent of votes.

But rather than an outright ban, a more likely model for Auckland is a plastic bag charge similar to that implemented in Britain in 2015.

British retailers with more than 250 full-time employees are required to charge 5p per plastic bag, which has resulted in a reduction of around 80 per cent.

There is an exemption on certain products (such as uncooked meat, poultry or fish), and small business in England are also exempt as the administrative burden is considered too high for them to manage.

“It’s simple,” says Goff. “Focus on your supermarkets — New World, Countdown, Pak’nSave, which already does it, as does The Warehouse.

“We would allow exemptions for meat, fish and vegetables, and encourage people to use reusable bags.”

Goff has two options for implementing charges on plastic bags.

“I can get an agreement from the supermarket chains to do it voluntarily,” he says.

“I have ready talked to both Foodstuffs and Progressive Enterprises.”

Alternatively, legislation could be passed through a local bill in Parliament.

Outgoing Prime Minister John Key was ambivalent about introducing any national policy to force a behavioural change.

But assuming New Zealand is serious about living up to its “100 per cent Pure New Zealand” tourism slogan, rolling out a policy throughout not only Auckland but the rest of the country must surely be just a matter of time.

Goff points to a 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton poll conducted last month, which found that 78 per cent of those polled thought it was a good idea to charge for plastic bags, and use the money raised to go towards reducing plastic’s impact on the environment.

“It’s a no brainer. I’ll be pushing hard on it,” says Goff.

A Million Trees programme
On the campaign trail, Goff announced an urban forestation programme for Auckland, aiming to plant a million, predominantly native, trees and shrubs across the region during his first term with council — in addition to those already being planted.

His goal is to “green our city”, offset carbon emissions, protect Auckland’s water quality by planting along rivers and coastlines, and improve our living environment.

The transformation of Te Auaunga Awa (Oakley Creek) is already underway. It is Auckland’s longest stream, and is undergoing a transformation to replace the concrete channel and underground pipes with a wider, natural flowing stream with cycle paths, walking trails — and 50,000 new trees.

Goff wants a formal plan for the Million Trees programme to be in place in autumn, in time for the start of next year’s planting season.

The programme has a budget of $1 million a year, which will fund practical support and help provide an overall strategy around which tree species to plant and where.

Local boards, schools, service and social sector groups, private entities, farmers, the Department of Conservation, New Zealand Transport Agency and developers are among the organisations which already plant trees and shrubs around the region. Council will work alongside all of these groups, and offset costs through partnerships.

“We have also got the potential to use nurseries within prisons and those used for training purposes,” Goff says. “Things are underway.”

Addressing global warming
Reducing carbon emissions from transport was a key priority on the campaign trail for Goff’s mayoral bid. Extending beyond an ambitious tree planting exercise, Goff plans to increase public transport use with non-polluting electric trains and light rail, and by building more walkways and cycleways.

“We’re more than a third of the country’s population, we have to demonstrate that we can pull our weight as well,” he says.

Interestingly, in the lead up to the byelection to appoint his Mount Roskill successor (which Labour’s Michael Wood won convincingly), Goff wouldn’t commit to paying half the $1.36 billion cost for Labour’s pledged light rail service from Mt Roskill to the CBD — instead disclosing he would negotiate hard to protect ratepayers.

“It will be carrying far more passengers than many other roads around New Zealand that are funded 100 per cent,” he said.

“We’d want to negotiate between the Labour Party position of 50 per cent funding and what would currently be paid for a road of national significance by central government, which is 100 per cent.”

Goff has said he would like to reduce the council’s 800 cars, and convert those that remain over time to electric vehicles.

Changing his own car has been something he’s quickly acted on.

“I don’t believe that council needs 800 cars, just like I didn’t believe the Mayor needed two chauffeurs and a big Holden — I have neither of those things now.”

Goff is now driving a Toyota Prius, and makes use of an electric bike.

“It’s fantastic because I can peddle up Albert St and look like I’m really fit — and it’s quicker.”

Dynamic Business: Is NZ having a Trump moment? (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Issues of social mobility rather than inequality may be to blame for the current rise in anti-establishment politics

As anti-establishment politics continues its seemingly unassailable rise, the concept of ‘inequality’ is often invoked to explain it.

While there is no doubt inequality has driven many to the polling booths in support of Donald Trump, Brexit, Pauline Hanson and others, arguably what is at stake is more an issue of social mobility.

People will tolerate inequality. Many accept it as a natural by-product of an economy that encourages entrepreneurship and growth. Indeed, Americans have voted in as their president a man who embodies that inequality.

But that tolerance comes with hope; a hope that they, or their children or grandchildren, can reach the upper echelons of the economy if they continue to work hard, make prudent long-term decisions, and have a little bit of luck.

Circuit breaker
Increasingly, Western economies have represented a closed circuit of economic enrichment.

Alan Krueger coined the term ‘The Great Gatsby Curve’ to describe the way inequality affects social mobility.

As Krueger summarised in a Brookings Institution blog, “greater income inequality in one generation amplifies the consequences of having rich or poor parents for the economic status of the next generation”.

Once the working class gets the sense that their prospects of upward mobility are waning, they are willing to turn to a circuit breaker.

The left
For decades, the left have adopted the rhetoric and policy that implies the economy is a ‘zero-sum game’.

Specifically, the consistent premise of their arguments has been that something that benefits the rich must automatically, and equally, cost the poor. A gain to one is a loss to another, they argue.

This is simply not the case when it comes to economic growth. But that is beside the point in relation to the present climate. The bigger problem is that such a paradigm becomes easily transported to the flow of people. Priming voters to see the economy as a zero-sum game makes it very easy for the nationalist right to argue that immigration is likewise a zero-sum game. It becomes difficult for the left to then argue that immigration is the one area where a benefit to one (the migrant) is not a cost to the other (the destination economy).

Immigration
Perhaps that is why we are beginning to see some New Zealand’s political parties tentatively embracing anti-immigration policy.

The Greens recently released a new, population-based immigration policy, stating they would cap overall net migration at one per cent of the population — including returning New Zealanders. “We know that immigration is becoming more of a concern for people and in my experience the vast majority of people aren’t concerned about immigrants, they’re concerned about the impact on house prices, and infrastructure,” says James Shaw, Green Party co-leader.

“Others around the world think as New Zealand First does,” said New Zealand First leader Winston Peters this year, at the party’s 23rd anniversary. “They were tired of being fobbed off about issues like immigration.”

Much has been made of a potential ‘Trump moment’ occurring in New Zealand in the future. Already, we may be falling into the same trap of the establishment in the US: being paralysed, fascinated even, by the phenomenon; musing over, sometimes analysing with impressive depth, its causes; but in doing so, failing to consider its remedies.

Inequality
But viewing inequality through a predominantly economic lens — incomes — fails to account for all the other things that make for an upwardly mobile life.

Anxieties do not only stem from income levels, but from not being able to get your child into a good state school, poor health, intolerance, a lack of social support, or few opportunities to progress.

Income is not everything. Indeed, it is everything aside from income that matters most for social mobility. From upward mobility, higher incomes follow.

Flawed measures
This is partly the reason why existing measures of inequality are flawed.

The Gini coefficient is the most used measure of inequality and looks through the lens of wealth at the income distribution of a nation’s residents. The number ranges from zero to one, where zero represents perfect equality — where everyone has the same income, and one represents perfect inequality. A higher Gini coefficient means greater inequality.

New Zealand’s Gini coefficient of 0.33 ranks New Zealand at 22nd — below the Netherlands but ahead of Norway.

However, aside from the fact that the measure cannot tell the difference between a society where everyone is equally poor and a society where everyone is richer, but incomes are more unequal, it is also deeply flawed as it fails to reflect the fact that inequality is about far more than simply income.

If the measure cannot reflect differences in health and social support and education outcome and opportunity and job quality, it means that you miss the root malaise that is behind Brexit, and to a certain extent Trump.

Prosperity
The Legatum Institute released its 10th annual global Prosperity Index last month — a huge study that measures the prosperity of 149 countries based not only on their wealth but also on a series of other factors including education, personal freedoms, how safe people feel and how strong community networks are.

This year, New Zealand topped the world for prosperity, and ranked first in the Index’s measure of economic quality, first for social capital, second for business environment, second for governance and third for personal freedom.

Harriet Maltby, head of policy research at the London-based Institute’s Prosperity Index team says that it is important to look at all inequalities combined, through one measure (prosperity), otherwise you miss the very reinforcing nature of deprivation.

“The problem is that traditionally, national success and related issues such as poverty and inequality, have been looked at from a purely economic perspective. While we recognise that wealth matters, so too does wellbeing.

“Income measures miss so much about what makes for a good life. That’s why the Prosperity Index looks at wealth and wellbeing combined.

“It is opportunity — real life chances — that drives prosperity, not money,” says Maltby. “This all feeds in ultimately to a country’s long-term success, which matters to business.”

Maltby, who is visiting New Zealand over January, explains that we need to shift our perceptions of what inequality looks like. “Making people richer in itself is not the answer”, she says. “We need a measure like prosperity that can look at wealth alongside all the other things that matter in life, and make policy decisions based on that. The New Zealand Government is already thinking like this, and other countries should do the same.”

“Britain is achieving what it achieves with a significant proportion of its population totally left behind in a whole load of dimensions. Imagine the potential and prospects for a nation if it could use and develop the talents of all?”

Globalisation
While it is useful to analyse the impact of globalisation on America’s rust belt, too much time spent examining the causes of those anxieties allows the establishment to feign intellectual interest in the winds of change, while making little or no progress in harnessing them for the good.

At last month’s Apec leaders’ summit in Lima, the leaders of the Pacific Rim pushed back against the creeping global protectionism, promising to continue to strengthen economic ties.

“If the United States doesn’t want to participate in free trade, [president-elect] Trump needs to know that other countries will,” said John Key at Apec.

“We hope he is part of the programme.

“But if not, we are going to continue doing things.”

Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull warned that protectionism is the way to poverty. “We have seen this film before, the world did this in the 1930s after the Great Depression and made it much worse,” he said. “It’s not only missing out on a positive but risking a very big negative in terms of destabilising the global trading and strategic system.”

What is often overlooked is that businesses, particularly those that benefit most from a globalised world, can play an important role in helping to find the solutions, and will benefit from operating in a country that offers up the talents of all its people.

Dynamic Business: We must plan ahead for our communities (NZ Herald)

Tim McCready

Maintaining a balance between economic and social progress is a key part of investing in our country

Should businesses provide more opportunities for employees to share in their firm’s governance, and ensure communities benefit more from their profits? These ideas appeared briefly on the radar in Britain recently.

British Prime Minister Theresa May appeared to suggest employee representation on company boards may be mandated while campaigning for the Conservative leadership, and mooted the idea of lump sum payouts (thought to be up to 10,000 ($17,746) per household) to communities affected by fracking.

The commercial end of town might also reconsider hiring policies.

Much resentment arises from a sense that upward mobility is limited for the working class. A significant driver of this is the growing norm that a university degree is essential to gain a corporate job. In the past, aspirational individuals from low income backgrounds could pursue an apprenticeship at prestigious firms in financial, administrative, or legal areas. Now they cannot without taking on three years (or more) of university fees and foregone income.

EY have already removed their GPA-threshold for screening university graduates in the UK, stating their research had “found no evidence to conclude that previous success in higher education correlated with future success in subsequent professional qualifications undertaken.”

It would also be helpful — though, granted, high risk — for some businesses to enter the political sphere when it comes to issues that affect their bottom line and, in turn, their workers. Being willing to more staunchly defend out-sourcing and its benefits — both to foreign workers and domestic consumers — would be helpful. Radio silence on globalisation implies shame about globalisation, and allows its opponents to steal the narrative.

This isn’t limited to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) debate.

Before New Zealand signed the much lauded China free trade agreement in 2008, protests were held up and down New Zealand, with claims that “so-called free trade with China has cost tens of thousands of skilled jobs in New Zealand manufacturing industries” and “under such an FTA the negative impacts will be felt by working New Zealanders and their families while the profits of transnational corporations will soar”.

The outcome was benign.

New Zealand’s trade relationship with China has nearly tripled over the past decade. Two-way trade has risen from $8.2 billion in the year ended June 2007 (the year before the free trade agreement was signed), to $23 billion in the June 2016 year.

At Apec last month, New Zealand and China announced they will upgrade the historic agreement to ensure it remains one of the highest standard agreements ever negotiated — particularly now that e-commerce has become increasingly significant for bilateral trade.

Like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, this deal received much support within the business community. Yet most businesses remain silent on why they think it is good for New Zealand. Some will argue it is for selfish reasons — that it allows the rich to get richer — but these arguments will be levelled by opponents regardless.

And very few business leaders actually made the argument for why the TPP could benefit their workers, New Zealand consumers, and citizens overseas (who, yes, are deserving of our consideration).

This will become more important as the negotiation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (an Asia-Pacific agreement that includes China instead of the US alongside a range of other countries), gathers momentum after the breakdown of TPP.

Opposition may become vehement, with widespread public scepticism of Chinese trade potentially dwarfing that of the US, making the political cost of New Zealand’s participation high. Unless the success story of the China free trade agreement is told — and not just by politicians — our participation in this key part of the region’s future trade architecture may be hindered.

It may also be prudent for businesses to bear the costs of retraining when jobs are displaced.

Maintaining a balance between economic and social progress is a key part of investing in the future. Building strategies to invest in society will create better, brighter and stronger communities. What’s more, an investment in social change is difficult to reverse — once it takes root, it can only grow.

It is more important now than ever that New Zealand’s top businesses take a serious role in this, and consider whether certain protection measures are necessary to minimise disruption. What these companies say and do could ultimately help — or hinder — New Zealand’s ability to solve those issues that will impact the future of the country.