Sunday, May 3, 2015

The Housing Party

The Housing Party Has Two Foundation Policies
Coming to both Australia and New Zealand
1.        Housing for those who can’t afford it.
Removing political red tape and bypassing massive profits made by banks, developers, and middlemen, to ensure government deliver affordable housing to the people who urgently need it.
This is not about stopping developers and builders making profits, far from it; this is simply about using the power of government to set up a supply of housing for those who desperately want their own home, but can’t afford it in this crazy market. This will not ruin the rich, but it will help the people poorer than them.

2.        Making politicians accountable.
Remove crown and judicial immunity to make all politicians and judges accountable to a duty of care by introducing fiduciary legislation. It is the only way to stop the endless hopeless mismanagement of our nation from our council’s right up to government.
Politicians make promises which they break time and time again even though they are voted in on the basis of a promise. Those in power fail to realise that is a breach of contract, a breach of fiduciary duty and in effect, fraud by knowingly making a promise in order to gain an advantage of something they have no intention of delivering. Politics has become a puppet of big business and hidden agenda and it needs to be brought back to the fundamental basics of representation of the people rather than the few who finance and determine their positions in power.
 Let’s talk getting you and your family into your own home –but can’t afford one?
Your Housing Party sets out to provide:

1.      Low interest housing loans - 3% - using government bonds. Our government can borrow money at 1-2% interest therefore could provide affordable mortgages to the home buyer.
2.      New housing and apartment subdivisions using the power of government re-zoning- removing the land developer’s profit- removing the builder’s profit- cheaper using the power of bulk buying. A $300,000 new house actually only costs around $171,000 to produce.
Let’s Talk Income 
In 1985 our first house cost $60,000 for a 3 bedroom timber home on 400sq m of land. The combined wages of my wife, a hairdresser, and me a chef, was $60,000. That house today is worth $800,000 and our wages are combined just $100,000 doing those same jobs. Housing has become unaffordable and either wages rise substantially, or the government make housing available on mass to those on basic incomes.
Here in Australia government numbers suggest the average wage is $72 800 per year. But remember – the average gives a misleading impression about what the typical worker earns. It is pushed upwards by the large salaries of a small number of very high income earners.
The median gives a more accurate sense of the typical worker’s wages. If you earn the median salary, your wage is in the middle of the distribution – it’s higher than 50% of workers and lower than the other 50%. Among full-time workers, the median was $57 400 in August 2011.
Even this figure, though, is a little higher than the typical worker’s wage. That’s because it doesn’t include the 3.5 million people who work part time. When you bring them into the fold, the average wage drops to $56 300, and the median drops to $46 900.
Now that's not enough to buy an average house which is around $400,000. The average wage earner is paying to live- rent power food transport, so your chance of savings is low. The banks require around a 10% deposit and anyone trying to save $40000 on the average wage knows that’s almost impossible.
Let’s Talk Cost to Borrow
Banks will charge you plenty because they love huge profits. But our government could borrow money at 1-2% interest; therefore it could provide affordable mortgages to the new home buyer. A new 3 bedroom house and land package under our proposal would cost you under $171,000. 
At a 3% interest rate, that costs you $5130 a year (interest only) - or $98 per week.
Add another $150 in repayments, bringing the total to around $250 a week to own your own home.
Why so Cheap?
·        We are removing the red tape for re-zoning
·        Removing the banks profit
·        Removing the developers profit
·        Removing the builder’s profit
·        Using bulk buying to get the best prices.
Why hasn’t Government Acted to Help You?
Those of us who have been around the corridors of politics from local through to parliament know politicians quickly get owned by powerful special interest groups.
The main political parties will lobby to shut down affordable housing- why?
1.         Treasury officials under pressure from banking friends who enjoy the profits
2.         Lobbyists and lawyers under pressure from bankers and land developers who enjoy the profits
3.         Local and regional councils not wanting their powerbase eroded.
The Housing Party was foundered in May 2015 by Christopher Wingate, a businessman, former property developer, who knows all about government, politicians, councils, banking, red tape, profits, and idiots in power.
“I am sure plenty of people get very frightened about the future of ordinary people struggling with paying bills, keeping a roof over their heads and food on the table. It should be the concern of every Aussie and Kiwi.  Who is worse, those who do wrong or those who stand aside and allow it to happen? We need a political revolution that draws a line in the sand that says ‘enough to endless greed at the cost of ordinary income families, we want a better country than where we have been heading.’ Politics is under the influence of powerful, wealthy special interest groups and too many families are hurting. Fact of the matter is that if we don’t do something now it will only get worse.”  

Christopher Wingate May 2015




Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Open letter to the leadership of Indonesia

Last night the Indonesian president had an historic opportunity to lead the world in the war against drugs. Instead he blew it, and with it, the credibility of Indonesia.

Imagine the young people from this day forward listening to Chan and Sukumaran's words describing how they made wrong choices and what led them down that path.
Imagine the young people watching a film of those about to be shot being taken from their cells to their place of execution.  Of having to say goodbye to their families and loved ones.  Good bye to life itself.
Then being tied up to wooden posts facing towards a firing squad. The suspense and fear and of the hearing the sound of their heart beating in its last seconds, when suddenly the president of Indonesia appears raising his hand to the firing squads to stop.
And standing there under the stars he gives a speech that makes history. A speech about the sadness over the damage drugs do to so many young people and how avoiding them involves making good choices. A speech of hope that highlights from this moment forward, that drugs will no longer be seen as a criminal act, but rather a medical problem. A speech that these young people's release is being done so that they could all go on as ambassadors in the new war against drugs.
People love to listen to stories of hope and of real life experience. They are inspired and driven by them and it makes the hair on the back of their necks tingle particularly at the part when it appears all hope is lost but suddenly the kind and brave white knight rides to the rescue.
Well the white knight never arrived. Instead, the Indonesian President missed his one and truly great opportunity to make history for the better. Had he arrived and done the great thing, the right thing, today, the President would be all over the world seen as the saviour, the redeemer of hope and all that can be good about man.
Instead, on Facebook, the Indonesian president is seen as a brutal heartless piece of scum. Today millions of people are posting stories of the Indonesia where murder and crime is common - gotten away with after payments of cash to corrupt leaders in flash houses. Today people are reminding each other what sort of neighbour we really have just north of us, where they refuse to accept phone calls from our leaders pleading that they spare the lives of some young people who made a mistake.   
Today and in the weeks leading up people on social networks, in lunchrooms in factories, in mothers groups, in clubs and pubs, people have all been talking about Indonesia's past wrongs as they reassess the conduct of our neighbour whom we have given billions of dollars in aid to. Yet in our moment of need they ignore us, treat us as if we have been bad to them.
Well from all our talks in reviewing our relationship with Indonesia we are reminded of the five Australian journalists they executed in Timor.  That type of story is now our focus. And along with it other stories of the mass murder that continues to this day in Western Papua, where well over 500,000 innocent indigenous people have been shot, tortured, raped and driven from their family homes and villages as Indonesia illegally occupies and exploits their historic land.
And although some of these acts have been of actions in the past, it’s today we clearly focus on the brute we have as our neighbour. Last night Indonesia had the chance to show a good light for its future, but it blew it and along with any hope we will trust them ever again. The actions they displayed throughout the arrest, the trial, the demand for bribes, the transfer to Nusakambangan Island, the family visits, the restrictions, the arrogant closed doors to diplomacy, and finally, the execution are all the actions of thugs.
Chan and Sukumaran went down the wrong path in their lives. It was perhaps an impulsive decision caught up in a fiction of adventure that was to have tragic consequences that had me, a father of four children, sadly and slowly cry himself to sleep in the early hours this morning.
Last night Chan and Sukumaran died smiling and singing while facing death in the eye. And from that we are reminded that redemption and forgiveness are great things. From this event we witnessed something truly beautiful, and that is two of our young people’s journey to find both themselves and love in everything they saw living.
But while they died with love in their hearts I only have one message for the Indonesian leadership; you are no longer welcome, our relationship is over. Your lack of empathy only attests to your brutal and corrupt self-serving leadership. In the eyes of millions of our people you’re not worthy of leadership anywhere, let alone our closest neighbour. Chan and Sukumaran were until the end wonderful humans, which is something you will never be.

So carry on your fake democracy of thuggery and organised crime. Of managing a nation where instead of caring for your people’s needs you spend billions and billions of dollars on weapons of war and on palaces and flash cars.

Last night was the end of any hope as we now focus on what you really are and in doing so we adopt your rules, your concept of no return, no redemption. Don’t ever think you can ever ask Australia for aid.  So leave now, don’t come back, we are no longer friends because you are nothing but heartless scum.  
Why Chan and Sukumaran deserved to live.
They were young when they got involved - youth make stupid decisions.
They weren't drug dealers- they were kids under the direction of an older experienced drug dealer.
The drugs were for Australian - not Indonesia.
Death penalty should only be applied for the very worse crimes involving callous murder.
The judges who imposed the death sentence were asking for bribes in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Other drug dealers in Indonesia appear to operate with immunity while others caught with larger quantities appear to get light sentences .

This was an AFP operation.

Monday, April 27, 2015

Time is running out to save Chan and Sukumaran- time for Diplomatic Protection to save them

Time is running out to save Chan and Sukumaran. We can save them. Now is the time for Australia to stand up to Indonesia’s persistent violation of international law, draw a clear line in the sand, and send a strong message to Indonesia and tell them that enough is enough. But too many politicians are content to follow the narrow rules of bureaucracy, even at the expense of human lives. It is likely the Government has been advised that they cannot extend diplomatic immunity to Chan and Sukumaran because other nations would complain. It is a typical bureaucratic nonsense that fails to appreciate the real world impact on human lives.

A politician for the people would say “forget the rule book, I am going on TV to tell the world that those boys have diplomatic protection, and I am going to save their lives above all else”.  So we need ask, why hasn’t Australia extended diplomatic protection to Chan and Sukumaran? It has already been said that, "If you don't attempt diplomatic protection haven't you then eroded your last chance to save their lives?”  Julie Bishop tried to say that they tried but failed.  But she clearly didn’t try hard enough.  Australia has not made a declaration in writing to Indonesia and to the media.  This would have forced Indonesia to recognise the diplomatic protection held by Chan and Sukumaran. If Australia does not act now, it sends a strong message to Indonesia that it can continue to violate international law. The toleration of this bullying costs innocent lives. Now is the time to act.
This is what the Australian government need to announce:
Today the Australia government informed the Indonesian government that both Mr Chan and Mr Sukumaran have diplomatic status and as such we expect they will be released to our embassy in Jakarta as soon as possible.
We have taken this unprecedented step in the interests of national security.  Therefore, no questions can be answered at this point of time surrounding this development, other than to say the history of this saga began as a Federal Police operation some 10 years ago, and as such, has the protection of the Australian government.
Re Diplomatic protection- yesterday the ABC carried an interview with Professor and Deputy Dean Donald Rothwell- BA; LLB (Hons) (Qld); LLM (Alberta); MA (Calgary): PhD (Syd)
ANU College of Law

On Saturday I wrote:

"If the Australian government gave Chan and Sukumaran diplomatic immunity, that would stop any plans by the Indonesians to execute them.
It’s not uncommon for governments to do this. We saw it after the 1985 bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland.  And more recently, after the murder of 2 Pakistani intelligence agents in 2011 by American CIA contractor Raymond Davis. In London in 1984, policewoman Yvonne Fletcher was killed on the street by a person shooting from inside the Libyan embassy, and again diplomatic immunity prevented the British authorities from enforcing their laws to prosecute.
The process would begin with the Australian government declaring that both Chan and Sukumaran have diplomatic protection. That would be done by the Australian Attorney General’s office informing Jakarta by urgent diplomatic dispatch. At the same time the Australian Foreign Minister would formally ask Jakarta for both men to be immediately released.
It would certainly annoy the Indonesians in the short term, but the dirt Australian Intelligence have on Indonesian officials, would soon see complaints disappear."
Since then I have read back through the Vienna Convention and I have a few left field ideas.

Article 39
"Every person entitled to privileges and immunities shall enjoy them from the moment he enters the territory of the receiving State on proceeding to take up his post or, if already in its territory, from the moment when his appointment is notified to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs or such other ministry as may be agreed."
I note there is no mention of any prohibition of retrospective appointments.

Article 24
"The archives and documents of the mission shall be inviolable at any time and wherever they may be."
The drugs at the centre of the charges were under an Australian Federal Police operation- in theory the Australian government could claim the drugs to be covered by diplomatic property. No drugs no case.

So, does the Indonesian justice system fail?

Indonesia wants to murder an innocent mother of 2 children aged 6 and 12. Mary Jane Veloso was taken into custody in Indonesia, due to the discovery of heroin in the lining of the suitcase that she carried to Indonesia. We believe that Mary Jane Veloso is a victim of Human Trafficking, who is innocent of knowingly carrying drugs.
Coming from a poor family in the northern Philippines, she had already once worked as a domestic worker (maid) in Dubai but returned to the Philip...pines after a few months. Mary Jane was the victim of attempted rape in her place of employment; she left her employer due to the continued threat and likelihood of being raped if she stayed.
Mary Jane’s efforts to find a new employer as a maid through job-placement agencies brought no work. Mary Jane was recruited by a family friend (God-sister) Kristina “Tintin” Sergio under the false information that she was being employed as a domestic worker (maid) in Malaysia. Even upon arrival in Malaysia, Mary Jane understood that she would be working as a maid. Mary Jane’s recruiter, who Mary Jane trusted as a friend, bought her clothes and personal items. Finally, her recruiter’s boyfriend gifted Mary Jane with a suitcase. Mary Jane insists that she had no knowledge of the drugs that were hidden in the lining of the suitcase.
Mary Jane’s situation merits special attention. As a single mother of two young sons, she was desperate for employment which made her vulnerable to the Human Traffickers. Not fluent in English and limited in formal education, Mary Jane was swept up in a flood of circumstances that resulted in her conviction: she had no legal counsel for most of the process, she did not understand most of the proceedings, and her family received death threats from the drug syndicate, warning them not to go to the media or seek help.

How corrupt can government and politicians be? Read my experience in this Government Inquiry - murder- fraud- huge money- and how immunity can be used to hide corruption.

Update- an open letter to the government of Indonesia- after the execution.

Sunday, April 5, 2015

NZ Students just remember the name of the man after you for debt- Rotorua MP Todd Maclay

I don't like Todd Maclay the guy is a wanker. Met him dealt with him he is only interested in himself and sucking up to climb the political party ladder at all expense. By god NZ politics has sunk to gutter levels and this story reminds me yet again NZ needs a political revolution.

It's time to break student debt taboo                                

The country's only specialist adviser on going bankrupt to clear student debt says it's time to talk more about the growing impact it's having on people's lives.
"I think we do need to talk more about it. It is almost like a taboo subject but it has a tremendous impact on people's lives," says Kristina Andersen from Auckland Tax Hub Limited.
She started working on student debts because they were popping up increasingly frequently when dealing with clients' tax issues, she says, and for some bankruptcy was the only realistic option.
Too many people headed abroad to work and paid little heed to their student debts, many assuming they would be told if they needed to make repayments.
But an Inland Revenue Department crackdown, and the compounding effects of interest swelling balances owed has produced a wave of bankruptcies, and student debt now seems to play a part in around one in ten bankruptcies where it is the debtor who asks to go bust.
Interest on student debt for borrowers outside New Zealand dropped from 5.5 per cent to 5.3 per cent on 1 April, and late payment interest moved dropped from 9.5 per cent to 9.3 per cent, but they are still rates at which debts compund fast.
There were just under 109,500 overseas-based people with student debt at the end of June last year, and they were a collective $863.3million behind in their repayments, with over 70,000 of them not meeting their repayment obligations.
That's a substantial chunk of the entire student debt owed, which passed the $14.25billion mark last year.
Andersen's is attracting the notice of an increasing number of desperate overseas debtors, some of whom risk arrest if they return to New Zealand, and then try to leave again.
But recalcitrant debtors overseas are being tracked down, and last month New Zealand signed an information sharing deal with Australia to make that easier.
Ad Feedback
That enforcement drive is prompting the wave of bankruptcies, she believes. "I think it is becoming more common because the IRD has stepped up collection efforts."
What is happening is it is revealing to people the scale that their debts have reached, or prompting them to get their heads out of the sand and deal with them. The results of ignoring their debts can be horrific.
"Debts that are 400 per cent to 800 per cent higher than the actual amount borrowed are common. The New Zealand government has the strange belief that high interest will somehow encourage people to pay. It doesn't. Even those who want to pay often have no hope of getting back in control of their debt. They end up having no option but bankruptcy and the government gets nothing," Anderson wrote in a recent blog.
She told Sunday Star-Times that desperate debtors tell her they assumed if there were a problem, then the taxman would have come knocking for the money earlier.
In addition, she says: ""People have genuine misconceptions about how it works. I hear on a regular basis 'I have been earning below the income thresholds and I didn't think I had to pay."
A one-year repayment holiday is allowed to borrowers heading overseas, if they apply for it, but otherwise they are expected to start paying back their debts immediately, regardless of income.
And people with unmanageable student debt can go bankrupt here without even having to return, and Andersen can help them do it.
Going bankrupt is a big deal for some people, especially those with partners and jointly-owned assets, though for singles it can come as an enormous relief, and is worth the temporary loss of freedom and credit standing.
It's not only the comparatively young doing it.
"We also deal with people who are retired," she said.
"If they don't go bankrupt, the alternative is to be hounded by the IRD forever more," she said.
She deals with clients from many countries, but Australia is most common.
Anderson gets on well with IRD staff, but acknowledges: "I'm often seeking a different outcome from the IRD."
And she'd love to see all New Zealanders, both those who stay and those who head overseas, talk more about student debt, including the psychological effect of having such a large debt hanging over them.
 - Sunday Star Times

Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Message to The Board of the BBC re Jeremy Clarkson's Top Gear- "Fuck Off"

With news that Jeremy Clarkson's is fired or may return to Top Gear with BBC conditions attached.....
If I were sitting on the board of directors at the BBC I would have one simple message.
"Take your fucking hands off Top Gear and jam your politically correct bullshit where the sun don't shine for the simple reason that that's the market Top Gear target. The viewers have spoken and they want exactly what Jeremy Clarkson delivers. It would be like a record company trying to tell rappers not to swear. So fuck off and leave them to what their fan base want."

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Chief Justice referred to judges as "snakes" and "scum"

Love a good fight

The controversial new Queensland Chief Justice Tim Carmody had referred to judges as "snakes" and "scum", said Justice Wilson.

Chief Justice and Snake Handler Tim Carmody

Retiring Queensland Justice Alan Wilson has condemned as a failed experiment the controversial appointment of Tim Carmody as Chief Justice, saying it had caused a "serious loss of morale" among judges.
In a speech delivered in the Banco Court in Brisbane on Thursday morning, Justice Wilson of the Supreme Court said he had agonised over making the remarks but felt driven to speak out.
"I hear judges at all levels of seniority, including quite young ones, speaking seriously of resignation. The problem is bad and, in my view, getting worse," Justice Wilson said.
"That is why I am driven to say something."
Former attorney-general Jarrod Bleijie appointed Justice Carmody to the position last year, controversially elevating him from his position as chief magistrate.
The move immediately prompted broad condemnation from within Queensland legal circles.
On Thursday, Justice Wilson accused Justice Carmody of "hypocrisy" and cited several reasons for ongoing tensions among the Queensland judiciary.
He condemned Justice Carmody's decision to remove himself from all trial division sittings in Brisbane.
"Traditionally, what judges do is sit in courts and hear and decide cases. The Chief Justice has not sat in an actual hearing since 15 February this year," Justice Wilson said.
"He has withdrawn himself from all published court calendars, so nobody knows when or whether he intends sitting again.
"The notion that there is scope for some kind of full-time public relations role for a head of jurisdiction, and little more, is surprising.
"So is the idea that judge work takes second place, and must give way to these kinds of events – which other judges do almost every day, but outside court sitting hours."

Carmody rejects attack on his 'integrity and performance'

Chief Justice Carmody, in a statement issued on Thursday evening, rejected the "unfortunate remarks" made by Justice Wilson.
"I am disappointed that he would use such an occasion to embroil the court in more controversy," he said in the statement.
Retiring Supreme Court Justice Alan Wilson 
       Photo: Retiring Supreme Court Justice Alan Wilson said he was driven to speak out against the Chief Justice. (Supplied: National Judicial College of Australia)
"I reject outright his attack on my integrity and performance as Chief Justice.
"His behaviour is the best argument yet for an independent judicial commission.
"I will not be making any further comment at this time."
Justice Wilson also criticised the recent sacking of Justice John Byrne as senior judge administrator.
"Finally it will be recalled that the Chief Justice, in his public remarks last Christmas, urged the judges to maintain civility and courtesy; but he has on different occasions referred to us collectively as 'snakes', and 'scum'," he said.
"Both the remarks, and this kind of hypocrisy, have a devastating effect on morale.
"They will strive to continue to serve with the sense of duty, the diligence, the high ability – and the independence – that they have maintained through the current troubles.
"But the natural feelings of discouragement created by things like these, and being publicly represented by a Chief Justice for whom most now lack all respect, is beginning to tell."

'Judges worried' about dealings with Court of Disputed Returns

Justice Wilson also questioned Justice Carmody's dealings with the Court of Disputed Returns amid a possible legal challenge to the result in the Brisbane seat of Ferny Grove shortly after the January 31 state election.
"The Supreme Court has for many years had a very sensible protocol which annually appoints judges to that court in strict order of seniority, to ensure there can never be any suggestion of political influence or motive in the appointment," Justice Wilson said.
"In the teeth of a possible contest about the outcome of the election in Ferny Grove, the Chief Justice's initial attempt to contest the automatic operation of that protocol and, then, his attempts to speak privately with the next nominated judge to that position about what he described in a memorandum as 'unresolved concerns' was rightly resisted by the judge, and unanimously condemned by the judges.
"The Chief Justice did, eventually, appoint the judge nominated under the protocol. It was the preceding events which caused the judges so much worry."
State Attorney-General Yvette D'Ath said Justice Wilson's comments showed the former government's decisions had an ongoing impact.
"Sadly, the arrogance extremism and betrayal of the LNP still has ramifications in the legal profession today," she said.

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

Mining magnate Andrew Forrest calls for an iron ore production cap from the enemy

Todays business headlines are "Mining magnate Andrew Forrest calls for an iron ore production cap to force China to pay more." Apart from the fact that Australian law makes any attempt to price fix illegal- (even though oil and supermarket chains have done it for years). Last night my wife and I were on a Perth motorway discussing the iron ore events of recent news and this is basically what I explained to her.

In 2003 the price of iron ore was around $30 a ton. The 3 major players were Vale from Brazil, Rio and BHP from Australia. Located in the Pilbara was an unknown small company called Allied Mining which was publically listed, and worth about $6m- chicken feed money in the mining game. Allied had no assets apart from a lease to an area of land the size of a small country of which that land had iron ore in the ground. Allied were trying to find ways to raise $$$$ just to complete a feasibility study good enough to then attract $$$ to build roads- rail- port- mines to bring it into production. They failed in that attempt.

However during that pursuit along came Andrew Forrest who was at that stage an ex mining boss who then pieced together a deal where he got control of Allied. Now pause at this moment and allow me to ask one simple question. Why the hell didn't BHP or RIO buy Allied ? Like WTF.

Anyway....... Andrew drafted some ideas of how the land could be made into a commercial mining asset and ended up getting the Chinese to invest $1.8b enough for Allied- now renamed FMG to produce 55m tons of iron ore annually. FMG shares went through the roof. From Allied 2003 values of $6m - by 2008 it went to over $30b and Forrest's shares were worth over $10b and suddenly he was Australia's richest man and everyone loved him...well except for ASIC who claimed he misled shareholders which finally ended after ASIC blew $23m of tax payers money and Andrew spent $30m on lawyers resulting in Forrest winning- that's another story.

Meanwhile, FMG staff were digging holes all over Allied/FMG land and suddenly had proven reserves of over 11b tons of ore in the ground. FMG announced they were now ready to expand from 50m tons a year up to 150m tons. Iron ore was over $160 a ton and all looked great.

Meanwhile BHP and RIO upped their production. In 2011 production on the books was Rio 220 Mt/y, BHP 180 Mt/y, FMG 55 Mt/y.   By the end of 2014 BHP said a ramp up to 270 Mtpa was achieved. RIO was up to 302.6 million tonnes and FMG up to 155Mtpa.
So 2011 a total from those 3 of 455Mtpa.
2014 a total of 727Mtpa.

Just to note that up until 2003, the Pilbara had produced 3.6 billion tons in the period 1960's- 2002.  Annual production in 2002 was a grand total of 180 million tons.

With an oversupply and a slowing China prices are now falling and Andrew Forrest has asked for everyone to slow down supply to increase prices. But to do that he has to get RIO and BHP to agree and sadly those 2 love each other and don't want to play ball with FMG. Apart from ASIC screaming price-fixing.

The current price of iron ore is under $55 a ton and with FMG Fe quality you discount that by 12% leaving FMG suffering which is perhaps what the big boys want.
With the falling prices BHP and RIO can argue they simply wish to retain cash-flow. Neither has debt associated with expansion and both companies are very wealthy.

FMG is sitting with $12b in debt.
FMG numbers are- Cost to port $32t
Cost incl finance $53t
Price discounted 12% on FMG grade 58Fe
(Market price is based on grade 62Fe)
And so at $55t less 12% puts FMG at a loss because
$12b at an av of 7% costs FMG $840,000,000 a year to borrow.

The Wingate Proposal:
A few years ago just after GFC I suggested that the NZ Govt underwrite a debt facility which would reduce FMG debt cost from an average interest cost of 7% to 3% providing an annual saving of close to $500m in interest. And as a reward the NZ Govt would get options to shares in FMG. If was a great deal but neither Andrew or the NZ Govt jumped at it.
Andrew personally owns 33% of FMG and somehow he is stubbornly wanting to remain at that level. In today's news the Australian govt raised $4b at 2.85% so cheap money is out there- you just need a govt credit rating to help you access it. Or a BHP.

Under the Wingate deal the new FMG numbers would be-
Cost to port $32t
Cost incl finance $39t- (debt being at 3%)
Current price $55t less 12% =$48.4
$12b at a cost of 3% costs $360,000,000
That's an annual savings of $480,000,000 in interest payments alone.

The bottom line is there is only about 65b tons of recoverable iron ore left in the dirt to dig up around the globe and FMG own 11b of that.
Annual demand is around 1.8Btpa so it won't be long before it goes through the roof. But meanwhile debt may drown FMG unless a friendly government decides on the Wingate proposal and views it as a strategic asset to add to their state asset portfolio and of course if Andrew decides he is prepared to part with some of his FMG shares. It's a big boys game and I think FMG need to start thinking about survival and not Andrew at all cost retaining his 33%.

The Wingate deal would save FMG on debt servicing. The Govt that underwrites a new debt deal would get options over FMG shares and no doubt the new debt deal would ramp up the price of FMG providing the underwriter with a huge paper profit on their options.

You never know- perhaps the new partner foreign Government Sovereign Fund and FMG could launch a takeover of RIO Tinto or BHP. It would create a massively important long-term asset.

Iron ore is a critical asset for global growth and even though we may go through periods of oversupply and financial instability in the financial markets nothing will stop human expansion.
There are plenty of sovereign funds out there who could absorb BHP RIO and FMG without any problem to secure their countries long term strategic planning. Surely it's only a matter of time for this to happen.

A few years back when FMG shares valued them at $14b another company I love - Oil Search - which was worth just under $7b. I suggested to Andrew he merge FMG with OSH to create a more pleasing diversified asset base. The combined company would dilute Andrew's FMG 33% to a combined group % of I recall something like 19%? - well today FMG are worth around $6b in share value and OSH are worth $12b- their position has reversed.