‘Show us the numbers’ on port privatisation

The Mari­time Uni­on says the May­or of Auck­land should “show us the num­bers” about Auckland’s fin­ances before push­ing port privat­isa­tion as the easy answer to its prob­lems.

The Mari­time Uni­on was respond­ing to claims by the May­or repor­ted in the media last week about the need for ser­vice cuts and asset sales as a solu­tion to rising rates. 

Mari­time Uni­on Auck­land Branch Loc­al 13 Sec­ret­ary Rus­sell Mayn says Auck­land rate­pay­ers are aware of pres­sures on City fin­ances, but want to see some hard evid­ence as to how privat­isa­tion is a solu­tion.

“At the moment it seems largely to be doom and gloom tac­tics to try and gen­er­ate a pan­ic and jus­ti­fy an exist­ing agenda.”

He says that selling prof­it­able stra­tegic assets comes with sub­stan­tial costs of its own.

Mr Mayn says a report com­mis­sioned by the Uni­on showed how port privat­isa­tion in Aus­tralia had led to major increases in port charges as private own­ers sought to recoup their invest­ment.

These charges would be passed onto busi­nesses and con­sumers, he says.

Mr Mayn says the Port of Auck­land is mak­ing good returns and has a very pos­it­ive future with its cur­rent own­er­ship mod­el.

“Privat­isa­tion of assets would lead to Auck­landers los­ing the fam­ily sil­ver, and then facing increased costs through profit gou­ging at a private port.”

Mr Mayn says it makes no sense to be talk­ing about major water­front beau­ti­fic­a­tion pro­jects on port land while at the same time claim­ing that the City was broke.

“The Mari­time Uni­on under­stands the pres­sures on Auckland’s fin­ances, but selling off the prime assets of the City for a one-off sug­ar hit does not address the long term issues and would lead to all sorts of con­sequences.”

He says one imme­di­ate cost sav­ing would be can­cel­ling over­seas con­sult­ants being paid hefty fees to build the privat­isa­tion case.