Now this is a merger: NZ mulls mega-fund

The New Zealand government could create a single NZ$40 billion ($30 billion) fund under a proposal mooted in its inaugural ‘Investment Statement’ published this month.

If adopted, the proposal – classified as one of the “high level choices in the financial portfolio” – would impose a central investment structure across all Crown Financial Institutions (CFI), which include the $13 billion New Zealand Superannuation Fund and the $9.7 billion Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) fund.

“At present the five CFIs are separate entities,” the government Investment Statement says. “A single fund manager across CFIs might increase efficiency and overall performance, and enable better aggregate risk management across the financial portfolio.”

As well as the ACC and NZ Super funds, CFIs also include the $4.5 billion Earthquake Corporation (EQC) fund and the $2.2 billion Government Superannuation Fund (GSF).

While classed as a CFI, the $1.35 billion National Provident Fund manages the private savings of individuals across several industry groups and falls under the government purview because it carries a Crown guarantee.

A spokesperson for the office of Finance Minister Bill English said the options included in the Investment Statement represented an “initial stocktake” of Crown assets and were not government policy.

Sponsored Content

“No decisions have been made or any in-depth analysis of the pros and cons [of creating a single CFI fund] has been carried out,” the spokesperson said.

Paul Dyer, economic adviser to Bill English, formerly held high-level investment positions at both NZ Super and the ACC fund.

The Investment Statement, also reveals the government would review the size and asset mix of the EQC fund (officially called the National Disaster Fund or NDF) following the massive earthquake that hit Christchurch this September.

“Both issues will need to be reassessed in the light of the Canterbury earthquake, which is likely to result in payments from the NDF of up to $1.1 billion,” the Investment Statement says.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Tennessee finally enters private equity game

The $28 billion Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System is a late entrant into private equity with its debut $25 million allocation to the Draper Fisher Jurvetson Fund X, occurring at the same time the fund has cut its allocation to short term assets by 5 per cent. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

UN fund increases equities exposure

The $37 billion United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund increased its allocation to equities by 4 per cent in the past quarter, at the expense of real estate and bonds, and is now overweight the asset class, as it continues to support active management. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS measures liqudity levels

  About half of the $201 billion in assets managed by CalPERS is available to liquidate within 90 days according to a new total fund liquidity assessment to be presented to the investment committee as part of the quarterly risk management update, which also shows the fund to have a total leverage of 19 per

Mapping the risks of bigger government

Bigger appetites for absolute return strategies, new attitudes to risk and governance, and the onset of major regulation – these were the forces for change identified in Watson Wyatt’s 2008 study, Defining Moments. But the social fallout from the financial crisis has sparked another phenomenon that could heavily impact institutional investors, according to Tim Hodgson

LACERS alters allocations to hedge against inflation

The $9.3 billion Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System will tilt its asset allocation to hedge against inflation and will discuss altering its investment policy to explicitly address inflation at each annual asset allocation review. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Massachusetts special commission recommends system changes

A recently completed report by a special commission into the appropriateness of the Massachusetts retirement system contemplated the defined benefit versus defined contribution benefit design, concluding that the existing defined benefit structure was optimal, in part because it put the portfolio management in the hands of professionals. The report entitled, The Special Commission to Study

Previous