Which of course is exactly the way it should be to avoid people like Little and EZ using it as R&D grants to their pet projects !!
Printable View
Iceman, I don't think you understand the system. There are already lots of scientists getting funded for their pet projects, whether from govt taxes, industry levies, etc. A great deal of these projects appear to go nowhere, but the effort still goes on, because some are spectacularly good. I see no reason why a private sector version of that, with projects started by companies who already know the market they are in ( a distinct advantage) and where they have to invest their own cash for most of it, wouldn't work at least as well.
In any case, just the reinstatement of Labour's R&D tax credits would help a lot. I had a person who called the other day about a project they'd started completely out of their own cash. Why don't you try Callaghan Innovation for funding I suggested. "We were basically warned off it for the effort you have to go to", was the reply.
What's the use of a govt R&D scheme that no-one wants to use, except the big players with heaps of admin staff already? That's not going to produce nimble export companies very quickly.
These are just my opinions, but maybe you know a lot more about R&D than I do, Iceman. What would you do to encourage more of it in NZ, to bring us back to an international OECD average spend?
I think Andrew Little referred to startups, probably not R&D really. If it really was easy enough to find a perfect investment decision, we'd all be doing it, right? All shares would keep trending upwards all the time.
Anyway, John Key does have a plan to balance the books. Sell one third of all the state houses. Something he didn't think was a good idea to tell voters about, before the recent election. Labour are going to have a field day with this.
Quite right, FP, if the opportunity is likely to be better than their 2/3rds of passive investments, they could fit it in. The pie chart shows that such private sector investments are currently a fairly small part of their conservative portfolio. However, they have done well with these settings. Maybe Andrew Little is suggesting a small tweak to the percentage in this investment area would have a big effect on startup funding in NZ. Best not create a DFC, something a bit smarter.
https://www.nzsuperfund.co.nz/how-we...tual-portfolio
Same page EZ - 'We only undertake active investment when we have a high level of confidence that it will, over the long term, be better than investing passively – by either improving the Fund’s returns, reducing risk (e.g. through diversification) or both.'
I don't think such a fund should be the source of funds to put into speculative good ideas that may come good companies.
Maybe Andrew Little is unaware the fund has been designed to be kept away from political influence. Maybe if it wasn't, one party, one day, might just use it to buy votes (e.g. Clark/Cullen with the consolidated fund) Maybe you should send the rule-book to Andrew Little.
By-election coming upas Sabin resigns
Nats increase majority in Northland?
Mind you it is huge to start with