The government should own a significant shareholding of a national airline?


On average, everyone agrees with significant nonconsensus between 72 voters.

Disagree
 
Agree

Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

The government should own a significant shareholding of a national airline

You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.


Reasons To Disagree

Gummint has no legitimate place in business.

28 September 2008

Airline competitors are chomping at the bit for piece of the market pie - if the national carrier is doing so badly to succumb to the competitors, then it deserves to fade away into history where it won't be using our tax dollars to maintain it's failures.

5 March 2009

Not necessary.

10 October 2010

It is not the place of government to run any commercial concern. By owning such they are in effect making us all shareholders in a company open to business risks; they do not have the right to do so.

27 August 2012

 

Reasons To Agree

Yes, at this stage at least.

9 August 2008

All countries seem to do it, or at least bail out their airlines. Seems to be in the national interest that an airline serves NZ national interests. If Qantas took over, we would be relegated to a provincial service like Tasmania, and how many people would come to NZ if they had to transit in Sydney?

3 October 2008

As a small nation we need to own this asset

17 September 2013

This is an investment that will make NZ richer

17 August 2014

Reasons for Remain Neutral

Air NZ killed the international market in Hamilton, but I suppose if we have less companies then we have less flights.

9 June 2009

My View

You can make your comments once you have voted.

You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.

Back to all voting categories or
Back to "Asset Sales"

This website is sponsored by Website World. Click here to find out more.