Thank you for contacting the Hon Simeon Brown, Minister of Health,
Minister for State Owned Enterprises, and Minister for Auckland.

If the topic of your correspondence falls outside of the Minister's
portfolio responsibilities, expresses a personal view, or is copied to
multiple Members of Parliament, then your email will be noted, and it may
be transferred to another Minister’s office, or there may be no further
response to you.

If your correspondence is related to a constituent matter, please get in
touch with the Minister’s electorate team by email
at [1][email address]

 

If it’s a medical emergency – call 111

This can include chest pain or tightness, difficulty breathing, choking,
severe bleeding or bleeding that won’t stop, sudden weakness or difficulty
talking, fainting or unconsciousness.

 

Associate Health Ministers

Please note that all emails are read, however please do not expect a
response from this office if your email relates to the below matters as
these responsibilities are delegated to Associate Ministers of Health.

·       Hon Matt Doocey, Minister for Mental Health and Associate Minister
of Health. If your matter relates to mental health, neurodiversity,
nutrition, or rural health, you can contact Hon Doocey by
emailing [2][email address].

·       Hon Casey Costello, Associate Minister of Health. If your matter
relates to emergency services, women’s health, aged care, or smoking and
vaping, you can contact Hon Costello by
emailing [3][email address].

·       Hon David Seymour, Associate Minister of Health. If your matter
relates to Pharmac, Medsafe, or medicines funding and supply, you can
contact Hon Seymour by emailing [4][email address].

Further delegations details of Associate Ministers of Health can be
found [5]here.

Other health support and services

·       Healthline – call free on 0800 611 116

·       If you’re concerned or not sure about something

·       If you can’t access a GP or you don’t have one

·       For advice about what’s happening for you and next steps

·       If you want advice on finding services near you
visit [6]Healthpoint.

·       If you want information on COVID-19, call the COVID-19 Healthline
on 0800 358 5453.

·       If you are feeling stressed, a bit overwhelmed or just need
someone to talk to Freecall or text 1737 any time for support from a
trained counsellor.

·       Call the Vaccination Healthline for information about COVID-19,
flu, MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella), Boostrix (whooping cough) on 0800
28 29 26 8AM – 5:30PM Monday to Friday.

·       You can also visit: [7]bookmyvaccine.health.nz.

·       If you or your family are not happy with public health services
received, you can [8]contact Health New Zealand.

·       If you would like to raise a complaint about a health and
disability service,  you can also [9]contact the Health and Disability
Commissioner.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]
3. mailto:[email address]
4. mailto:[email address]
5. http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-uni...
6. https://www.healthpoint.co.nz/
7. https://bookmyvaccine.health.nz/
8. https://www.tewhatuora.govt.nz/corporate...
9. https://www.hdc.org.nz/making-a-complain...

Dear Adam,

On behalf of Hon Simeon Brown, Minister of Health, Minister for State Owned Enterprises, and Minister for Auckland, thank you for your email.

As the OIA request falls within the portfolio responsibilities of the Minister of Transport, we have transferred your OIA request to Hon Chris Bishop.

Thank you again for writing to the Minister.

Kind regards,

Georgia Carr
Private Secretary Administration | Office of Hon Simeon Brown MP

Member of Parliament for Pakuranga
Minister of Health | Minister for Auckland | Minister for State Owned Enterprises
Email: [email address] Website: www.Beehive,govt.nz
Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

show quoted sections

OIA25-CB043

 

Dear Adam,

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your transferred Official
Information Act request dated the 11^th of March 2025.  You have requested
the following information:

 

" Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

We received your transferred request on 13/03/2025.  We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than
10/04/2025, being 20 working days after the day your request was
received.  If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Office of Hon Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing | Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport |

Associate Minister of Finance | Associate Minister for Sport & Recreation
| Leader of the House | MP for Hutt South
Office: 04 817 6802 | EW 6.3

Email: [1][email address]   Website: [2]www.Beehive,govt.nz

Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections

Dear Adam,

 

I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request, received
by this Office on 13/03/2025, in which you requested the following
information:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

This email is to advise you that your request is being transferred to the
Ministry of Transport and the Treasury as your request is more closely
connected to the functions of these agencies. In these circumstances, we
are required by section 14 of the Act to transfer your request.

 

Kind regards,

 

Office of Hon. Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing| Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport | Associate Minister of Finance |
Associate Minister for Sport and Recreation | Leader of the House

Private Bag 18041 |Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

Office phone: +64 4 817 6802 | Email: [1][email address]

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

From: Christopher Bishop (MIN)
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2025 10:45 AM
To: [2][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

OIA25-CB043

 

Dear Adam,

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your transferred Official
Information Act request dated the 11^th of March 2025.  You have requested
the following information:

 

" Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

We received your transferred request on 13/03/2025.  We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than
10/04/2025, being 20 working days after the day your request was
received.  If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Office of Hon Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing | Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport |

Associate Minister of Finance | Associate Minister for Sport & Recreation
| Leader of the House | MP for Hutt South
Office: 04 817 6802 | EW 6.3

Email: [3][email address]   Website: [4]www.Beehive,govt.nz

Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections

Kia ora Adam,

 

It appears likely that your original request will need to be clarified or
amended to enable us to respond. Would you be able to advise the timeframe
for which your request covers?

Please note, any clarification or amendment of a request is considered to
be a new request for the purpose of calculating the maximum statutory
timeframe for response—see section 15(1AA) of the Official Information
Act.

Ngâ mihi nui,

 

Harry (He / Him)

Kaitohutohu - Ratonga Minita |OIA Adviser - Ministerial and Executive

 

 

From: Transport Portfolio <[email address]>
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 10:28 am
To: [FOI #30386 email]
Subject: RE: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

Dear Adam,

 

I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request, received
by this Office on 13/03/2025, in which you requested the following
information:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

This email is to advise you that your request is being transferred to the
Ministry of Transport and the Treasury as your request is more closely
connected to the functions of these agencies. In these circumstances, we
are required by section 14 of the Act to transfer your request.

 

Kind regards,

 

Office of Hon. Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing| Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport | Associate Minister of Finance |
Associate Minister for Sport and Recreation | Leader of the House

Private Bag 18041 |Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

Office phone: +64 4 817 6802 | Email: [1][email address]

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

From: Christopher Bishop (MIN)
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2025 10:45 AM
To: [2][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

OIA25-CB043

 

Dear Adam,

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your transferred Official
Information Act request dated the 11^th of March 2025.  You have requested
the following information:

 

" Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

We received your transferred request on 13/03/2025.  We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than
10/04/2025, being 20 working days after the day your request was
received.  If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Office of Hon Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing | Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport |

Associate Minister of Finance | Associate Minister for Sport & Recreation
| Leader of the House | MP for Hutt South
Office: 04 817 6802 | EW 6.3

Email: [3][email address]   Website: [4]www.Beehive,govt.nz

Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections

[IN-CONFIDENCE]

Dear Adam

 

Thank you for your request under the Official Information Act 1982, which
was received on 17 March 2025 by the Treasury. A response will be provided
in accordance with the Act.

 

The Treasury may publish the response to your Official Information Act
(OIA) request. When you are provided with a response to this request, you
will be informed about whether the response to your OIA request will be
published. If the Treasury does publish the response to your OIA request,
personal information, including your name and contact details, will be
removed. This publication process does not apply to extension letters or
transfers.

 

Thanks,

 

 

 

 

Ministerial Advisory Services | Te Tai Ôhanga – The Treasury

Visit us online at [1]https://treasury.govt.nz/ and follow us on
[2]Twitter, [3]LinkedIn and [4]Instagram

 

From: Transport Portfolio <[5][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 10:28 am
To: [6][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: RE: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

Dear Adam,

 

I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request, received
by this Office on 13/03/2025, in which you requested the following
information:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

This email is to advise you that your request is being transferred to the
Ministry of Transport and the Treasury as your request is more closely
connected to the functions of these agencies. In these circumstances, we
are required by section 14 of the Act to transfer your request.

 

Kind regards,

 

Office of Hon. Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing| Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport | Associate Minister of Finance |
Associate Minister for Sport and Recreation | Leader of the House

Private Bag 18041 |Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

Office phone: +64 4 817 6802 | Email: [7][email address]

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

 

Link: [8]File-List
Link: [9]Edit-Time-Data
Link: [10]themeData
Link: [11]colorSchemeMapping

show quoted sections

Kia ora Adam,

 

Just checking in, would you please be able to advise the timeframe for
which your request covers?

 

Ngâ mihi nui,

 

Harry (He / Him)

Kaitohutohu - Ratonga Minita |OIA Adviser - Ministerial and Executive

 

 

 

From: OIA
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 3:22 pm
To: [FOI #30386 email]
Subject: Seeking Clarification: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information
request - Request for Information on Private Equity Contributions in
Transport Projects and Value for Money Considerations

 

Kia ora Adam,

 

It appears likely that your original request will need to be clarified or
amended to enable us to respond. Would you be able to advise the timeframe
for which your request covers?

Please note, any clarification or amendment of a request is considered to
be a new request for the purpose of calculating the maximum statutory
timeframe for response—see section 15(1AA) of the Official Information
Act.

Ngâ mihi nui,

 

Harry (He / Him)

Kaitohutohu - Ratonga Minita |OIA Adviser - Ministerial and Executive

 

 

From: Transport Portfolio <[1][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 10:28 am
To: [2][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: RE: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

Dear Adam,

 

I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request, received
by this Office on 13/03/2025, in which you requested the following
information:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

This email is to advise you that your request is being transferred to the
Ministry of Transport and the Treasury as your request is more closely
connected to the functions of these agencies. In these circumstances, we
are required by section 14 of the Act to transfer your request.

 

Kind regards,

 

Office of Hon. Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing| Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport | Associate Minister of Finance |
Associate Minister for Sport and Recreation | Leader of the House

Private Bag 18041 |Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

Office phone: +64 4 817 6802 | Email: [3][email address]

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

From: Christopher Bishop (MIN)
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2025 10:45 AM
To: [4][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

OIA25-CB043

 

Dear Adam,

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your transferred Official
Information Act request dated the 11^th of March 2025.  You have requested
the following information:

 

" Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

We received your transferred request on 13/03/2025.  We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than
10/04/2025, being 20 working days after the day your request was
received.  If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Office of Hon Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing | Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport |

Associate Minister of Finance | Associate Minister for Sport & Recreation
| Leader of the House | MP for Hutt South
Office: 04 817 6802 | EW 6.3

Email: [5][email address]   Website: [6]www.Beehive,govt.nz

Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections

Kia ora Adam,

 

On behalf of the Ministry of Transport, I acknowledge the transfer of your
Official Information Act request on 17 March 2025 seeking:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport on this matter?"

 

As per our previous correspondence, it would be greatly appreciated it you
would you be able to advise the timeframe for which your request covers.

 

We will endeavour to respond to your request as soon as possible, and in
any event no later than 14 April 2025 being 20 working days after the day
your request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by
then, we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

The Ministry publishes Official Information Act responses on our website
when there may be wider interest in the information released. This means
the information provided to you might be published after you have received
it.

 

Ngā mihi nui,

 

Harry (He / Him)

Kaitohutohu - Ratonga Minita |OIA Adviser - Ministerial and Executive

 

 

 

From: OIA
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 3:22 pm
To: [FOI #30386 email]
Subject: Seeking Clarification: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information
request - Request for Information on Private Equity Contributions in
Transport Projects and Value for Money Considerations

 

Kia ora Adam,

 

It appears likely that your original request will need to be clarified or
amended to enable us to respond. Would you be able to advise the timeframe
for which your request covers?

Please note, any clarification or amendment of a request is considered to
be a new request for the purpose of calculating the maximum statutory
timeframe for response—see section 15(1AA) of the Official Information
Act.

Ngā mihi nui,

 

Harry (He / Him)

Kaitohutohu - Ratonga Minita |OIA Adviser - Ministerial and Executive

 

 

From: Transport Portfolio <[1][email address]>
Sent: Monday, 17 March 2025 10:28 am
To: [2][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: RE: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

Dear Adam,

 

I refer to your Official Information Act 1982 (the Act) request, received
by this Office on 13/03/2025, in which you requested the following
information:

 

"Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

This email is to advise you that your request is being transferred to the
Ministry of Transport and the Treasury as your request is more closely
connected to the functions of these agencies. In these circumstances, we
are required by section 14 of the Act to transfer your request.

 

Kind regards,

 

Office of Hon. Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing| Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport | Associate Minister of Finance |
Associate Minister for Sport and Recreation | Leader of the House

Private Bag 18041 |Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

Office phone: +64 4 817 6802 | Email: [3][email address]

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

From: Christopher Bishop (MIN)
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2025 10:45 AM
To: [4][FOI #30386 email]
Subject: OIA25-CB043 RE: Official Information request - Request for
Information on Private Equity Contributions in Transport Projects and
Value for Money Considerations

 

OIA25-CB043

 

Dear Adam,

 

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your transferred Official
Information Act request dated the 11^th of March 2025.  You have requested
the following information:

 

" Under the Official Information Act, I request information on the
repayment expectations for private equity contributions in transport
projects.

 

Specifically, I'm interested in understanding how this approach is
considered value for money. The Crown can typically borrow at the
government bond rate, offering a lower risk return rate of 4.64% for
10-year bonds. In contrast, private equity investment usually requires a
return exceeding 8%. This suggests that if the taxpayer funds a return
higher than the government borrowing rate, and if the budget isn't
balanced, we're essentially borrowing more at 4.64% to pay higher returns
on the equity investment. Moreover, even if the taxpayer directly funds
it, the interest cost for the project would be significantly less than the
required return of the private equity investment.

 

It appears counterintuitive when the government could initially fund these
projects through debt, thereby owning the asset at the end of the period.
The cost of maintaining a fully owned asset is typically much lower than
the lease costs private investors require to generate a return on their
capital. Furthermore, leasing means the Crown foregoes any potential
capital appreciation, which is then factored into the market return that
the private equity holder requires. How is this approach consistent with
achieving value for money?

 

Could you please provide any briefings and analyses from the Department of
Transport and/or Treasury on this matter?"

 

We received your transferred request on 13/03/2025.  We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later than
10/04/2025, being 20 working days after the day your request was
received.  If we are unable to respond to your request by then, we will
notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Office of Hon Chris Bishop

Minister of Housing | Minister for Infrastructure | Minister Responsible
for RMA Reform | Minister of Transport |

Associate Minister of Finance | Associate Minister for Sport & Recreation
| Leader of the House | MP for Hutt South
Office: 04 817 6802 | EW 6.3

Email: [5][email address]   Website: [6]www.Beehive,govt.nz

Private Bag 18041, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160, New Zealand

 

Email disclaimer:

 

This email communication is confidential between the sender and the
recipient. The intended recipient may not distribute it without the
permission of the sender. If this email is received in error, it remains
confidential and you may not copy, retain or distribute it in any manner.
Please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message
and all attachments. Thank you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

show quoted sections