Second smelter

Press, 1 April 1981, Page 24

Second smelter

Sir,—Mr Muldoon has “explained” the second smelter in childish terms which would earn him; a C minus in standard two geography. He gets a lower mark in economics at any level, because the electricity is sold overseas at a much lower price than equivalent energy imported as petroleum. We also export cheap coal, which should also be saved for electricity, to a country which got our scrap iron on the same “overseas funds” . argument used by Mr Muldoon. Our coal might not be.flung back at us, but in a world conflagration our American allies could easily write us off, with our Pacific neighbours, as spoils to the friendly Japanese. Mr Muldoon is naive if he thinks Fletchers is on. “our” side against -international capitalism, and sacred exports (worth more daily to exporters, with creeping devaluation, at the expense of the rest of - us) transcend health, hazards.— Yours, etc., : • ■ •: •> , VARIAN J. WILSON.' • March 30, 1981.

Sir,—Mr Muldoons comments about the ■ proposed smelter for Aramoana (‘'The Press,” March. 30) are most revealing of the way development decisions are being made in Wellington on our behalf. The Government may very well have the best information about the project (has not Professor van Moeseke just made public his second report?), but they are clearly incapable of incorporating these economic facts of life into their decisions. Commit"ment to the smelter seems to be based entirely on political - pig headedness. The project does not measure up on any criteria— economic, social or environmental. What may be good for Fletchers and Alusuisse is not automatically good for the rest of us. The national interest will be best served by a labour-intensive strategy; that is, less energy and capital and more people and jobs. Who needs the foreign money-lenders?— Yours, etc., (Ms) K. E. CRONIN. March 31, 1981.

Sir,—l think that New'Zealanders were supposed to be reassured by Mr Muldoon’s statement on the Government’s ability to control multinational aluminium companies, and the .fact that were they not able to,, they had a guardian angel in Fletchers. Such statements on multinationals reflect a naivety in our Government Ministers; indebted countries the size of New Zealand are not autonomous bodies when it comes to dealing with large multinationals as Ghana’s recent experience shows. Kaiser’s aluminium smelter uses 70 per cent of Ghana’s electricity and they pay for it 0.48 cents a unit. This barely covers the interest and the amortisation payments on the loans taken out by Ghana, to build the Akosorribo Dam, which supplies the electricity. In the _ loan agreements for the financing of the Akosombo Dam, the World Bank placed considerable

leverage on Ghana. If the country moves to change any of the agreements with Kaiser, without World Bank approval, the bank can call in all its Volta River project loans. Whose interests are such finance institutions protecting?—Yours, etc., NOEL GOURDIE. March 31, 1981.