By ANNE BESTON
The yellowed newspaper clippings in Herald files show just how long and controversial TVNZ chairman Dr Ross Armstrong's career has been.
His story has been one of power and influence but also one of survival.
From his first appearance in the files in 1982, when he made headlines supporting the late Prime Minister Sir Robert Muldoon in a verbal trouncing of then Chamber of Commerce chief Allan Williams over New Zealand's economic prospects, Armstrong has been a man in the news.
Once a staunch National Party man, he has become a Labour Party favourite, gaining high-profile positions in key areas outside the Government.
He is a friend of Prime Minister Helen Clark, sharing her love of classical music and is reportedly an admirer of her intellect. He is also a friend of long-time Labour MP and parliamentary Speaker Jonathan Hunt.
He has needed his friends in high places over the past few years. In his toughest times, he has counted on the support of his political masters. But if that support has eroded, then this time he may just have to walk the plank.
Armstrong, 63, is the son of a self-employed draughtsman. He was born in Devonport, Auckland, and almost became an Anglican priest, even though his family was not particularly devout.
However, a business career finally won out over a religious one, although it is said he carries his Christian principles to this day.
After completing a BA in mathematics and philosophy and an MA in philosophy, he went to Northern Ireland, where he studied for a doctorate in natural law at Queens University in Belfast.
When he returned home, he embarked on his business career with the Kerridge Odeon Corporation, managing the hydrofoil Manu-Wai passenger ferry service to Pakatoa Island.
In 1967, he set up a one-man fish exporting firm, a successful business which he still runs.
His political life with the National Party began in the mid-1970s on the North Shore. He ran National MP George Gair's North Shore electorate for five years from 1980 and became a member of the party's national executive in 1983.
In 1985, he was elected chairman of the National Party in Auckland and held the job for six years, earning a reputation as a hands-on worker and sometimes ruthless chief.
He made a tactical error in backing sitting National Party president Neville Young over challenger John Collinge in 1989 but, perhaps not unsurprisingly, was the first to extend an olive branch to the new president.
He left his Auckland divisional chairman post in 1990 without a backward glance, surprising many National stalwarts by expressing no desire to become an MP or challenge for the party presidency.
And over the next few years it seemed he travelled full political circle, finally appointed by a Labour-led Government to the top job in TVNZ in early 2000.
He was already chairman of New Zealand Post and would later be called on to steer through the pet Kiwibank scheme of then Alliance leader Jim Anderton.
Rows with his deputy at New Zealand Post kept Armstrong in the headlines but it was his appointment as TVNZ's chairman that would ensure he was never far from controversy.
He cheerfully accepted the chairmanship at a time when it was considered by many to be a virtual hospital pass.
The company was suffering one of its worst public humiliations - having to pay $6 million to sacked newsreader John Hawkesby.
The hiring and firing of the high-profile - and highly paid - news presenter was adjudged a debacle from start to finish and morale at TVNZ had hit rock bottom.
Company chiefs were also unsure just where the new Labour-Alliance Government would take TVNZ. Ministers had expressed a desire to take the company in a more non-commercial direction.
But Armstrong rejected any softly, softly approach on taking up the reins. He waded into the presenters' salary row by threatening cuts and took a swipe at news chiefs over their handling of the story on the so-called cancer cure lyprinol, all within the first month of his appointment.
There followed a series of public spats. Early last year current affairs show host Paul Holmes accused the chairman of revealing details of his pay. Armstrong refused to back down and Holmes later apologised for his public outburst.
Three months later - and more seriously - the chairman was quoted as saying the departure of news and current affairs boss Paul Cutler was a "dream scenario" for the future of TVNZ.
The comment sparked fury within the company and missiles were lobbed from both sides, with Armstrong taking the extraordinary step of laying a complaint against his own company, alleging the news item was inaccurate and misleading.
That complaint was partly upheld and a truce finally called, but this year the issue flared again, with reports that TVNZ staff were concerned about a review, driven by Armstrong, of editorial protocol, the policy that governs editorial independence.
In May, the Herald reported that a London lawyer was paid more than $40,000 for advice on the issue, something National MP Murray McCully said was an example of inappropriate use of private legal advice by the Government.
Since then, things have been relatively quiet on the news front for Armstrong, the man whose salary has climbed in the past 10 years to rival that of the Prime Minister's at around $200,000 a year.
But suddenly the chairman is again on the offensive, this time over his reported comments that he advised a group of businesses of a "range of benefits" if they joined a group advising the Government on policy governing public-private partnerships.
A document by him reportedly implied that Helen Clark had requested the group be set up, but a spokesman said the Prime Minister had never heard of it.
Acting Prime Minister Dr Michael Cullen angrily advised Armstrong to reconsider his public posts after learning of the document's contents.
Helen Clark has called Armstrong's comments most unwise and said she had had no idea that people were being advised they might get the inside running on major works.
For the moment, the chairman is doing what he does best - defending his position, adamantly rejecting any suggestion of wrongdoing.
An old friend, biographer and academic Professor Barry Gustafson, said he had not closely followed the latest events in Armstrong's career but was quick to defend his integrity in both business and political dealings. "If this time there has been an error then it's an error in terminology. I'm sure he wasn't thinking in terms of corruption or people having the inside knowledge and making a lot of money out of it."
There had always been a hazy line between advising the Government and getting the inside track on big projects that could have financial advantages.
Armstrong had always been a man who was "very straight", said Gustafson. "But I'm not saying he's not a clever operator."
Former National Party president John Slater, another long-time colleague, who once said Armstrong would make a fine job of steering the state broadcasting ship, said yesterday that he could not comment because he had been out of the country over the past few days.
He would sit this one out, he said, but then could not resist asking, "What's happened today?"
Told that Armstrong had said he would issue a statement yesterday but had changed his mind on advice by Cullen, Slater couldn't help a knowing chuckle.
"One doesn't normally want to antagonise the minister to whom you report. It's hardly a career-enhancing move."
Just where Armstrong's high-profile career is now headed is open to question.
Armstrong tempts businesses:
Extracts from the document "Infrastructure partnership between the Government and the private sector", prepared by Pacific Road New Zealand and dated October 4.
Ross Armstrong says he takes responsibility for the paper.
BACKGROUND:
A public and private sector partnership (or PPPs) involves the Government and private sectors working together to deliver infrastructure of services that have traditionally been provided by Governments. PPPs involve private financing, construction and management with the Government approving, sometimes co-financing and certainly supervising the project.
To date, the discussion about PPPs has been in the context of land transport policy reform with a particular focus on roads and public transport. But international experience shows that PPP opportunities exist well beyond these areas. There will be no-go areas. These are likely to be education and health.
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WANTS:
To this end and in the first instance, it is proposed to establish an informal group of senior ministers (including the Ministers of Finance and Transport - the chairman of the commerce committee, David Cunliffe, is also likely to be involved) and private sector leaders from the infrastructure sector.
At the Prime Minister's request, this group is being called together by Ross Armstrong. This is likely to be the foundation group for an Infrastructure Partnership Task Force and, ultimately, a National Infrastructure Council.
COMMITMENT REQUIRED
There will be costs including administration, travel, drafting and printing discussion documents, those associated with (former Australian Prime Minister) Paul Keating's visit, legal and tax advice and market research.
It is envisaged that the above costs will be shared between the Government and private sector participants. One option might be for the Government to finance the market research, likely to be the most significant single cost.
BENEFITS FOR YOUR COMPANY
* The benefits from participation for private sector leaders is to contribute to the development of a policy and legal framework for PPPs that not only will work and be in the same public interest but will open up huge opportunities for their businesses.
* This process will short-circuit traditional bureaucratic and consultation procedures and ensure that a PPP framework acceptable to the private sector is in place more expeditiously.
* As a likely member of any National Infrastructure Council, your organisation will have a continuing opportunity to contribute to policy formulation in this area.
* Given limited participation from each infrastructure discipline, your organisation will have "first mover" advantage in terms of future involvement in PPP projects.
* You will have the opportunity to develop useful relationships at a political level and with senior private sector colleagues that will be beneficial.
The letter that offended the Government: