Everyone seems ‘gung ho’ about China being a market on our doorstep and effectively there for the taking. But Claridge points out this is not necessarily so; he insists our lack of a ‘NZ Inc’ China plan underlines an overall lack of leadership in our primary sector. And if there was a leader, would everyone play ball? Experience suggests not.
Government departments – notably MPI – were asleep on the job when the China market started to grow and only in the last year or so have they begun to put the necessary resources into that market.
Further alarming is Claridge’s view that though each department directly involved in China – NZTE, MFAT and MPI – may have a China plan, a high level strategic goal is notably absent. This looks like the old ‘she’ll be right’ ‘number eight wire’ approach Kiwis once promoted, and it must be seen for the nonsense it is.
Equally worrying, if Claridge is right, is that Fonterra seems to want to do its own thing and not come under an ‘umbrella’ plan. Understandably the co-op has specific interests it must pursue, but hold on – it occupies a privileged position by dint of government legislation; this makes it responsible not only to shareholders, but also to New Zealand taxpayers and the nation generally.
Fonterra does a great job for the New Zealand economy, but some of its recent antics have been distinctly ‘un-New Zealand’ like. Its media statements on the inquiry into the botulism scandal and its recent failure to renew cheese licences in the US have appeared with little sign of remorse. ‘Sorry’ has no place in the Fonterra dictionary.
In the global dairy market, especially China, New Zealand is not bullet-proof and the Europeans are ready to pounce. The Danes go in with strong business links, a strong industry and they work co-operatively; they ‘gang tackle’ China.
A lack of cohesion among New Zealand dairy players, large and small, could spell doom for our products in China. So the China strategy should not be driven by one company alone; we need a NZ Inc approach.
