Forum Archive Index - September 2001

["Gary Wilson - Brisbane" <fastmail@bigpond.net.au>]

Ben,

 

Yes, I too enjoyed your piece re Air New Zealand.  I think you are a bit tough on the NZ Govt given the complex International protocols re landing rights etc and the wider international climate.  This was a snowballing chain of events where most of the players were playing hardball - but no one had control of the game or understood the rules!  I agree the Govt should have allowed the Singapore proposal to proceed - and indeed now I am sure they wished they had!!  The trouble was, they where probably trying to appease parts of their own party, the Aussies and the wider NZ electorate as well.  They took time over this, as they really did not know how to meet these competing interests.  In the end by trying to please everyone they pleased no one - but this is often what Govt.s are about!.  It does highlight the idea of strategic business's and national airlines which the Governments (on both sides of the Tasman) in various ways aid is a half baked.  If these are so important they should be 100% Government owned, otherwise they should be "pure commercial" interests.  {This is why I don't think Telstra is a great stock.} 

 

As an aside a lot have accused Air NZ of incompetence - but Air Singapore allegedly one of the best airlines in the World was in this game for a very long period, ( and still is?) so unless their role was part of a very complex plot, only events have saved them from a blot on their record - though I suspect there is a lot of soul searching going on at Air Singapore's HQ as well as other places.