Submission
Which option do you prefer?
Option Two – The alternative option – Keep Aurora Energy
Further comment
I am highly concerned about who any potential buyer of Aurora would be, and the fact they wouldn't have Otago residents' best interests at heart.
Given Aurora’s large capex requirements in the coming decade, I would not trust that an external company (as owners) would meet these requirements, or invest any more than the bare minimum maintenance costs, meaning the accumulative degradation of these assets which residents of Dunedin and wider Otago depend on.
I understand that the Commerce Commission has oversight over the energy industry. However, recent news stories about energy companies making sizable profits during the cost of living crisis, and paying out large dividends instead of reinvesting capital into upgrading the network or increasing renewable energy production, gives me little hope that a non-council owned Aurora would be of any benefit to the ratepayers.
Further, the fact that the Council itself noted Aurora is a “natural monopoly” (“Options Overview” DCC webpage) is even more reason to fear the control of Aurora going to a disinterested corporation. It is my view that the potential buyer is likely to be overseas based, and therefore also likely that the sale of Aurora would result in a flow (and loss) of money from New Zealand to overseas investors.
I also believe the Council should have proposed a third ‘middle’ option of selling only a part of Aurora. I, and likely many others, would be in favour of the sale of a 49% share in Aurora, so that the Council both maintains control of the strategic assets and gains proceeds to put towards an investment fund. Whilst I understand a higher price may be obtained for the sale of 100% of the company, there is more at stake with this decision than chasing such speculated “premiums”.
Supporting information
No associated documents with this submission.
Submitter
Submission id number: 1045690
Submitter name:
Thomas Ingham
Organisation