Sydney Morning Herald

New Zealand billionaire Graeme Hart is hatching a deal for his Carter Holt Harvey cardboard box business to join forces with its counterpart at Amcor, in a play aimed at challenging the dominance of Richard Pratt's Visy.

Mr Hart has been been in talks with Amcor for two months to form a joint venture between the separate corrugated and paper businesses of his forest products company and the Australian packaging giant. A combined operation would have revenue of about $A1 billion a year. Amcor has run a knife through the hierarchy of its cardboard box business over the past few weeks, making redundant at least three senior executives including its boss, Darryl Roberts. The Victoria-Tasmania general manager, Andrew Harris, and another senior executive, Walter Gross, departed almost immediately last month.

A former Amcor executive said the latest redundancies were aimed at lowering costs to a level that would eventually determine the shareholdings of both Amcor and Carter Holt in the joint venture. "Hart looks like he is going to take management control of it," the executive said.

The deal, expected within months, will raise concerns about a duopoly in Australia's $A2.2 billion cardboard box market, which is still reeling from the record $A36 million fine imposed on Mr Pratt and Visy for a price-fixing cartel with Amcor. The former Amcor executive claims the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has given tentative approval to an Amcor-Carter Holt joint venture.

Mr Hart has gone on a spending spree since taking full control of Carter Holt early last year for $NZ3.3 billion, buying Swiss packaging giant SIG, Blue Ridge Paper Products of the US and beverage packaging assets from International Paper. But New Zealand's richest man will still have an estimated $A2.5 billion-plus to spend after selling a 20 per cent stake in Goodman Fielder in October and from a yet-to-be completed auction of Carter Holt's timber products business.

"They may be looking at it," another Amcor executive said late last week of Mr Hart's intentions for Amcor. "There's a rumour about Carter Holt Harvey every week - Graeme Hart has run the ruler over Amcor." Amcor executives will brief investors in Sydney on Tuesday next week about the overall business.

A New Zealander, Greg Beatty, the former boss of Fonterra Australasia, took over as Amcor Australasia's managing director in October from Louis Lachal, a 27-year veteran of the company who will retire next year. Also departing Amcor Australasia are Melanie Huson, the human resources chief who leaves next week, and another executive, Shay McQuade. Before Mr Hart took over Carter Holt, the company is understood to have offered the Amcor board about $A1.3 billion for its fibre packaging business about three years ago. Sources say Mr Hart has since made several approaches to Amcor for the business, to no avail.

Carter Holt is the third-largest cardboard box company in Australia behind Richard Pratt's Visy Packaging - which has about 47 per cent of the market - and Amcor (less than 40 per cent). Between them, the three control the cardboard box markets on both sides of the Tasman. Amcor's cardboard box businesses in Australia and New Zealand have struggled from a lack of investment.

LAST ORDERS: Australia's Industrial Relations Commission has upheld the sacking of a supermarket manager who drank two beers over lunch.

Employment lawyers are warning staff against too much celebration this Christmas after the Industrial Relations Commission upheld the sacking of a supermarket manager for having two beers at lunchtime.

The commission ruled Tony Selak had breached the conditions of his employment as the manager of a Safeway store in Melbourne by violating the "zero tolerance" policy on drinking in working hours enforced by Woolworths, which owns Safeway.

Mr Selak, 36, admitted having two glasses of beer over lunch in May, but argued that the policy should not apply to managers, who did not operate equipment or machinery. He said he was drinking only to help create a more relaxed environment in which he could convince a valuable employee, who was thinking of resigning, to stay with the company.  But Commissioner Gareth Grainger found Woolworths's decision to sack Mr Selak, who had worked for the company for 18 years, was "not harsh, unjust or unreasonable".

The law firm Fisher Cartwright Berriman said Mr Selak's case had national implications, especially given the looming Christmas season and its traditional festive lunches.  Alistair Salmon, a partner with the firm, said: "This decision makes it clear that an employee who breaches an alcohol policy and is sacked then, prima facie, does not have sufficient grounds for unfair dismissal.  "Employees need to look at their contractual obligations as they move into the party season, where alcohol consumption greatly increases, notwithstanding some of those obligations might be considered unreasonable."

PEOPLE on Australian Workplace Agreements earn an average of $106 ($NZ123) a week less than their counterparts on collective agreements, the biggest study of the new workplace laws has found.

The study of 8343 people, half-funded by the Federal Government, shows workers on AWAs earned an average $1069.57 a week, compared with $1175.97 by workers on collective agreements, with both groups working an average 44 hours a week.

The Australia@Work report, by the University of Sydney's Workplace Research Centre, shows why the debate over wages and working conditions has been ranked by voters as a major election issue since the March 2006 Work Choices law began to take effect.

The most recent Bureau of Statistics figures suggest workers on AWAs are earning 9 per cent more than those on collective agreements. But the bureau only measured the first eight weeks of Work Choices, up to May 2006, while this new study is based on data gathered until July this year. The study found collective bargaining has been disappearing for many years and that the trend is accelerating, helped by Work Choices and AWAs.

Common law contracts are also growing in popularity. Employees on these contacts are overwhelmingly managers and executives, and their average salary is $1584.29 a week.

The report also reveals Australians have some of the longest working hours in the world. More than a fifth work 50 hours or more a week. Miners work an average 55-hour week, and 21 per cent of all workers wished they could work fewer hours.

The Howard Government introduced AWAs in 1996 to encourage employers and staff to directly negotiate pay and conditions, but the report finds that direct bargaining is increasingly uncommon. Forty-six per cent of all people on AWAs say they had no opportunity to negotiate their contents. Of 177,000 people who moved onto AWAs this year, 56 per cent said there was no negotiation. The authors suspect employers are using "non-negotiated AWAs" to move workers from award entitlements to the cheaper minimum legal standards.

As this trend emerged early this year, the Government introduced a fairness test in May to stop employees trading away entitlements like overtime and shift penalties without fair compensation. The report is the first instalment of a five-year study in which the same people will be interviewed each year. It was jointly funded by the NSW Labor Council and the Federal Government through the Australia Research Council. The report also found high-skill employees on
non-negotiated AWAs are working more paid and unpaid hours than those on individual contracts. Staff on these take-it-or leave-it AWAs "earn the lowest hourly rate regardless of skill level," the report says.

James Chessell, a spokesman for the Minister for the Minister for Workplace Relations, Joe Hockey, challenged the conclusions of the study. "We think the ABS figures are a more reliable guide than a study cooked up by [Research Centre director] John Buchanan and his cronies," Mr Chessell said.

DESPITE all the tough talk and financial muscle-flexing about his ability to bid simultaneously for retailers on both sides of the Tasman, Woolworths chief Michael Luscombe has yet to apply for approval from the local competition regulator to be involved in the Coles sale.

Speaking yesterday after announcing solid growth in third-quarter revenue, Mr Luscombe confirmed Woolies had had talks with "a wide variety of interested parties" about a possible joint offer for some assets of rival retailer Coles Group. He added the company had lodged a formal "expression of interest" for Coles's assets, a move that takes it one step closer to entering the Coles data room which is expected to be opened to other bidders this week.

Mr Luscombe, who took the top job in October, was also considering making a bid for Warehouse Group, New Zealand's biggest general merchandise retailer, in which it already owns a 10 per cent stake.

Earlier this year he applied to New Zealand's competition regulator for clearance, despite no legal requirement to do so at this stage of the process. A decision is expected later this month.

However, Woolies has yet to approach the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which yesterday confirmed it had not received an application for clearance.

Woolworths spokeswoman Claire Buchanan said there was no legal requirement to apply for clearance in Australia either as no formal bid had been made.

Coles put itself on the auction block in February after admitting it was unable to generate ambitious profits promised in the wake of earlier offers by US private equity group Kohlberg Kravis Roberts.

So far only two bidders have officially declared they are in the running for Coles, Perth's Wesfarmers, with its own $19.7 billion bid, and a consortium of six private equity firms led by KKR.

Mr Luscombe was coy about his interest in Coles, and was careful not to stray from his carefully worded script.

"I wouldn't want you to write that something dramatic has happened in the last couple of days," he said, referring to talks between the two retailers.

He declined to say whether KKR or British retailer Tesco were potential bidding partners, and was diplomatic when asked for his reaction to Wesfarmers' complaints that other potential buyers could be handicapped if Woolworths was given a confidential insight into the retailer's books.

"We will work with the ACCC or anyone else, should the process move forward," he said. "We are going down our track, other [bidders] will walk down another track, we make no judgement on whether what they are doing is good or bad or indifferent."

COLES chairman Rick Allert yesterday fired the starting gun for the group's big sell-off, confirming that a second consortium led by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts wants to buy the retailer and is prepared to outbid Wesfarmers' opening offer.

The official start of the bidding war confirmed the entrance into the race of KKR - a move widely predicted.  The six-member KKR-led consortium told Coles it was "confident" of matching or bettering Wesfarmers' $16.47 per share offer, providing it is satisfied with Coles's books. These are to be shown to suitors from as early as today.

The sharemarket, in particular hedge funds, appeared to be confident final offers will come in well over $17, with Coles shares closing yesterday at $17.33, up 36c from Thursday's closing price, and above Wesfarmers' offer.

Tyndall Investment Management fund manager Craig Young said he believed a bidding war was a "possibility", but not a certainty.

"Still, there's a big chance KKR will be the only bidder for the whole lot," he said, supporting market talk that Wesfarmers is only after the Officeworks and Target stores.

The news comes one week after Wesfarmers secured an 11.3 per cent stake in Coles, which owns a suite of supermarkets and petrol stations, as well as Officeworks, Kmart, Target, liquor stores and hotels.  The Perth group has since obtained control of 12.8 per cent of the retailer's shares, beginning with the purchase of 34 million shares from former chairman Solomon Lew.

He stands to make more money if the bid increases, thanks to an escalator clause in his contract with Wesfarmers, according to documents released to the stock exchange. For example, if the company is sold to a rival for $17.47 a share, Mr Lew will take home a further $17 million on top of the $659 million he has already made.

The retailer put itself on the auction block in February after admitting it was unable to generate ambitious profits promised in the wake of earlier offers by KKR.

Sources close to KKR yesterday said they were still nutting out a confidentiality deal with Coles which restricts it from making approaches to other potential bidders or buying shares.

The confidentiality agreement is a condition of entering the virtual data room.  The due diligence process is expected to take between four and six weeks, and will likely be followed by offers.  The Coles board will ultimately recommend one of the offers to shareholders, who will vote on the outcome.

Wesfarmers yesterday emphasised its offer was preferable because it was the only bidder able to offer Coles shareholders scrip in its company, which meant they could continue to profit from growth in the supermarkets, liquor, petrol and general merchandise stores.

It also appealed to investors' patriotism, saying its ownership would "ensure that Coles remains in Australian hands" and crowed that it could do a deal faster than any competitor.

"[Wesfarmers' offer] is not subject to regulatory impediments, ensures that Coles remains in Australian hands and can be implemented with minimum delay to avoid further damaging ownership uncertainty impacting on the Coles's businesses," chairman Richard Goyder said in a statement.

Coles has rejected Wesfarmers' $A19.6 billion ($NZ21.4b) offer and warned shareholders not to sell their shares. The company will open its books to suitors tomorrow and expects to attract a higher offer.

The nation's No.2 retailer said Wesfarmers' cash offer of $16.47 a share was not high enough to be recommended to investors. Coles confirmed officially that any negotiations with Wesfarmers were over.

"Until such time as Coles' ownership review has been completed and the Coles board has made a recommendation to shareholders, Coles shareholders are advised not to sell, or grant economic or voting interests over their shares," the company said in a prior statement.

In a statement to the market this morning, Coles said it was committed to running a competitive process in relation to its ownership. "Coles Group is committed to running a fully competitive process in evaluating ownership alternatives in order to maximise shareholder value for Coles shareholders,'' the company said.

Coles said it had not indicated that the price on offer in the Wesfarmer indicative proposal would be the one it was prepared to recommend to shareholders, and advised them not to sell or grant economic or voting interests over their shares.

Wesfarmers lifted its stake in Coles a further 1.5 per cent at the weekend to 12.8 per cent after the Hedley Group pledged its shares to the bid. Coles said the Wesfarmers-led group's current interest in voting power was not enough to prevent or deter the emergence of an alternative takeover proposal.

Meanwhile, all bidders who have signed confidentiality agreements will be able to gain access to Coles's books as soon as tomorrow.

Nevertheless, Wesfarmers' chief, Richard Goyder, was adamant yesterday that his company was in pole position. He hoped he would not be caught in a bidding war although there are no signs that potential rivals have walked away.

Mr Goyder was upbeat, hoping last week's share raid and offer would give it the edge over rivals who were yet to view the books. "Part of our proposal was a request we could get in and do due diligence quickly, and the Coles chairman has indicated a preparedness to work with us on that," Mr Goyder said.

Performance figures were to be given only to those participating in the auction process Coles is running and were to be used to reassure bankers and advisers of the retailer's financial strength. Before Wesfarmers appeared on the scene, potential bidders had agreed not to make hostile offers to gain access to the figures. Those who had signed up for the auction included UK retailer Tesco, Woolworths, private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and French group Carrefour. All are now believed to be in the wings.

Sources close to Coles last night denied Wesfarmers had been given special treatment or that the due diligence process had been fast-tracked. They said they had spent the weekend negotiating confidentiality agreements with "several parties".

Mr Goyder said his company was "happy where we are" with 12.8 per cent of Coles and did not plan to push for 15 per cent. Mr Goyder said he wanted Coles's board to quickly approve his consortium's bid but its directors are likely to spin the sales process out as far as possible to maximise returns.

With the private equity consortium led by American group Kohlberg Kravis Roberts desperately scouting around to raise enough cash to lift last year's $18 billion offer, the Coles board would be mindful that it must maximise the price for shareholders.

Wesfarmers said it hoped the sale process would be short but Coles wanted to get the best price by attracting as many buyers as possible.

"A lot will depend on the flow of information," Mr Goyder said.

Due diligence is expected to take teams of lawyers, advisers and specialist retail executives from each of the bidders up to six weeks to complete.

WESFARMERS boss Richard Goyder is aiming to take on Woolworth's newly appointed boss Michael Luscombe for domination of Australia's retail sector as he prepares to launch Australia's biggest ever takeover bid: a $19.6 billion hostile move on Coles Group.

The Coles board will continue negotiations with Wesfarmers today but the Perth company is demanding Coles open its books immediately so it could launch a hostile takeover bid as soon as possible.

Coles was planning to open a "data room" next week so that competing private equity groups - who planned to engage in a tender auction run by Coles - could conduct due diligence.

Wesfarmers and its partners, Pacific Equity Partners, Macquarie Bank and UK private equity group Permira, have built an 11.3 per cent stake in Australia's second largest retailer.

But tensions already have emerged, particularly with the separate deal struck with former Coles chairman Solomon Lew. Mr Lew has pledged to offload his 5.8 per cent stake to the Wesfarmers consortium but only if he has an "escalator clause" which will deliver him the benefits of any higher offers.

Offshore hedge funds have demanded a similar deal and halted the syndicate's plans to snap up 15 per cent of Coles on Monday night.  Under the escalator clause, Mr Lew would be entitled to receive any higher price for half his stake.

But Wesfarmers refused to offer the same deal to hedge funds.

Wesfarmers has offered $16.47, the same price it paid for its stake on Monday night, with a cash or cash and scrip offer, pitched at a 3 per cent premium to the previous closing price and 49 per cent higher than the shares were trading in August last year before the share price rocketed on early takeover speculation.

Meanwhile, the Kohlberg Kravis Roberts consortium was hinting it was considering raising its $15.25 a share offer.

Under the Wesfarmers plan, it will take outright control of Target and Officeworks. But it will take a half share in the company's core operations - the Coles and Bi Lo supermarkets, fuel and convenience stores, bottle shops and Kmart - in partnership with a trio of private equity companies: Permira, Pacific Equity Partners and Macquarie Bank.

Of the private equity groups' half share, Permira will own the largest stake (35 per cent), followed by PEP (10 per cent) then Macquarie with just 5 per cent.

Chief executive Richard Goyder said the speed of the offer would help avoid further decline in earnings at the poorly performing supermarkets by resolving the ownership uncertainty.  "We believe the acquisition of Coles would be a positive step for the shareholders of both companies," Mr Goyder said.

The moves come after sources revealed market leader Woolworths made a rival offer for Solomon Lew's 5.8 per cent stake in the company in an attempt to deal itself in to any break-up of the Coles Group.

If the deal goes ahead, Coles would probably leave its Melbourne heartland and could be based in Perth.  It would also mean Wesfarmers would own three of the nation's biggest retailing stores: Bunnings, Target and Officeworks.

Coles has 3000 supermarkets nationwide, as well as dozens of Kmart stores, Target stores, 119 liquor stores, 83 hotels, petrol stations, about 100 Officeworks stores.

Bunnings has 210 stores and had earnings of $420 million last year.

COLES Group's chairman, Rick Allert, would have been greatly relieved yesterday when he greeted Wesfarmers boss Richard Goyder and his proposal to buy the retailer at a price well above last year's feelers at $18 billion.

Make no mistake, at $16.47 per share plus a 19.5c dividend, this is not enough to buy the company - but it's a good starting point and one that will open a bidding war with some fair dinkum contestants.

The very fact that recalcitrant shareholder Sol Lew was prepared to tip his 5.83 per cent holding into Wesfarmer's war chest was the best indication yet that the gates have opened in the race for control of Australia's second largest retailer.

There is also no doubt that Wesfarmers and its equity partners in this transaction are in pole position. Until now, the problem for Coles in attempting to undertake this auction is that there has only been one real bidder for the entire group, the syndicate led by KKR.

Thanks to Goyder, the game has now changed and KKR has little choice but to get into the bidding process and justify the time and resources it has spent on Coles and come up with a better alternative.

The price offered by Wesfarmers is shy of the mark. Coles would probably rather see $18 per share for the group and only time will tell whether this is achievable. The Wesfarmers proposal is strategically clever and fairly well executed.

In buying 11.3 per cent of Coles, Wesfarmers has snookered anyone else from launching a takeover bid with the mandatory 90 per cent acceptance limit. Wesfarmers now has a blocking stake.

Any group that wants a piece of the action now will need to pursue Coles via a scheme of arrangement: 75 per cent of the value of shares and 50 per cent of those voting at a shareholder meeting.

It would have been better for Coles that Wesfarmers did not conduct this lightning raid because it inhibits competition. Having said this, getting Lew out of the picture is a major strategic and public relations coup.

For his part, Solly Lew's Premier Investments has negotiated an escalator clause in the sale agreement whereby it will benefit from any increases in the bidding.  Premier also has options in place to get a slice of any enhanced price from another party.

Whichever way you carve it, Lew is going to come out of this process with hundreds of millions in profit, every last cent of which will be looking for a new home.

As far as Goyder is concerned, a successful bid for Coles will be both a career defining move and a company transforming event. Since taking the reins at Wesfarmers from Michael Chaney a couple of years ago Goyder has been living in the shadows. Like Chaney, Goyder is a value-driven conservative investor whose mantra is patience, timing and value. The raid on Coles is clever and strategic.

Under his proposal Wesfarmers will bid for Coles using cash and Wesfarmers scrip. There will be few if any foreign ownership problems and thanks to the scrip elements there will be some rollover relief while at the same time it will allow the current Coles shareholders to share in the upside from the renovation of these retail businesses

Goyder last night described the move as classic Wesfarmers, saying it was logical and sensible to bring these assets into the company's stable. He has the former head of Coles supermarkets, Steven Cain on board to spearhead the revival of the Coles supermarkets business.

The plan is to retain 100 per cent control of Target and Officeworks and sell the Coles everyday needs business (supermarkets, liquor and petrol) into a joint venture controlled 50 per cent by Wesfarmers. The remainder will be owned 35 per cent by Permira, 10 per cent by Pacific Equity Partners and 5 per cent by Macquarie Bank. The beauty of this offer is that, assuming the transformation of the assets, Wesfarmers will be able to keep, sell or list the everyday needs business down the track.

However, the reality is this still all comes down to price - and the ball is now in KKR's court. Until now it has been the only player in the game. For its part, KKR still sees itself as a real contestant and we should see the colour of its money sooner rather than later. The official line is that the third option of a break-up of brands is still a possibility.However, this has got to be running a poor third in this process.

The nicest woman in banking returns to Australia this month after five years heading Westpac in New Zealand. But will Ann Sherry stay a banker or take up a career in politics? Greg Bearup reports.

For once, Auckland's summer weather is behaving, and men in deck shoes are strolling down to the harbour.

"Highest boat ownership in the world," says the proud cabbie as we pull up in the driveway of a grand timber house overlooking one of the yacht-dotted bays.

Up the drive, I can hear a woman belting out Kiss' trashy anthem I Was Made for Lovin' You.

"I just can't get that song out of my head," says a beaming Ann Sherry as she throws open the door, a towel turbaned on her head and lipstick plastered on her big broad smile – even at this early hour.

The song is a remnant from her office's 80s-themed Christmas party the night before, where she made an appearance as a Dynasty-era Joan Collins, complete with big hat and taffeta frock.

Ms Sherry, 52, Westpac New Zealand chief executive, may be one of the highest- paid executives in New Zealand ($2.7 million a year) and one of Australia's most successful businesswomen, but she is no bland banker.

Born in Gympie, Queensland, where her parents were pharmacists, she rebelled at school, she says, about hem lengths and the like.

At university in the 1970s she railed against everything that Joh Bjelke- Petersen's Queensland stood for. She marched for abortion, against uranium mining and against the ridiculous ban on marching itself.

She worked as a union organiser, a prison social worker in the borstals of Britain, and as a senior bureaucrat in the Victorian public service in the areas of childcare, health and women's policy. She was then head-hunted during Paul Keating's prime ministership to lead the Office of the Status of Women.

Just 18 months into one of feminism's dream gigs, she sensed that federal Labor's time had run out and jumped to Westpac, rising to become its most senior Australian female executive and pushing through reforms under which the bank became the first to offer paid maternity leave.

In 2002, she was sent to head the show in New Zealand and the Pacific.

Somehow she managed all this and maintained a family life. She married Michael Hogan a week before her 21st birthday and 18 months later, while still at university, gave birth to a boy with Down syndrome.

The marriage is still going strong and son Nick is now 30 and has a full-time job, a girlfriend and a passion for the Sydney Swans.

People like and respect Ann Sherry, and it is difficult to ferret out those who don't. Even union leaders who dealt with her during the difficult merger of the Bank of Melbourne and Westpac in 1997 – which resulted in 1400 job losses and more than 100 branch closures – describe her as frank, pragmatic and honest.

"She always delivered on what she promised," says Paul Schroder of the Finance Sector Union. "I would rather be told to get stuffed to my face, and know where I stand, than have someone go behind my back – and with Ann you always knew where you stood."

One of Mr Keating's former senior advisers, Mary Ann O'Loughlin, says she would make her prime minister in an instant – "not because she is a sheila, but because she would do a great job".

"To understand Ann," says one of her friends, "you only have to look at how she dealt with Nick, the way she and Michael dealt with it. Can you imagine having a Down syndrome baby while at university? Everything after that has been a breeze."

Later Ms Sherry and I are sitting in a lounge at Auckland's airport, about to fly to Christchurch for a staff presentation, and talking about the birth of her son.

She is wearing a pinstriped suit and pearls, with a couple of super-sized diamond rings on either side of her wedding band. Her wavy blonde hair is swept back and she has alluring blue-grey eyes. She laughs a lot but for the moment is serious.

"It had been a perfectly normal pregnancy and it wasn't until Nick was born that they whisked him away and said, 'Oh, we think there is a problem.' I was devastated – it was as if the sky had collapsed."

The young couple were pressured to put their son into an institution – it was the done thing in those days. "But I thought, 'Why would you give your baby away?' "

Amid all the chaos, and with friends and family giving conflicting advice, she had a crystal-clear moment in which she realised that all she wanted for her baby was for him to be the best he could be and to be given every opportunity to thrive.

"We had to flip from pain and sadness to say, 'Okay, what does this mean?' People sometimes describe me as tough, but it is those sorts of experiences that teach you what tough is."

A month after Nick was born, she was back at university, often with him in a bassinet in classes.

"I didn't want to be sentenced to a life of servitude, so it was a matter of finding a balance where Nick had care and was stimulated and had opportunity and Michael and I could also have a life."

They took Nick backpacking through Africa and India when he was a toddler, and fought to have him admitted to regular schools. On his second day at preschool, a group of mothers confronted her at the school gate, saying, "Your child doesn't belong here."

"I turned and glared at them and said, 'He belongs here as much as your child does.' I was so angry during that period, wanting to fight for Nick's rights."

Nick has grown into a confident and likeable man with a good sense of humour. Ms Sherry calls him her greatest achievement.

When she got the job in New Zealand, the family were sitting around discussing all the options and Nick declared he didn't want to go.

"I want to breathe my own air," he said. "Ha," laughs Ms Sherry, "He'd been watching too much bloody Oprah."

A friend and carer who had helped out with Nick for many years moved from Melbourne to Sydney and into their house in Balmain to be flatmates with him and to allow Ms Sherry and Mr Hogan to move overseas.

"It will be funny when we move back, as Nick has grown up a lot in those few years. He's learnt how to cook – a chef from one of the pubs has been giving him lessons – and is buying his own food, although budgeting is still a problem."

Ms Sherry is returning to Australia at the end of this month to an as-yet "undefined role" at Westpac because Nick's carer is moving back south.

Ms Sherry is constantly in the news and sits on various national boards and committees, and people like what they see.

David Tripe, director of Massey University's centre for banking studies, says Ms Sherry has greatly improved Westpac's image in New Zealand as well as staff morale. "Bank staff everywhere can be made to feel like lepers," Dr Tripe says. "But if you have a CEO who is out there with a positive image and who takes a genuine interest in the staff then that makes you feel better as an employee."

But what about her management of the business? Generally it is seen to have been fair, though she was criticised for failing to enter into a fierce home mortgage rate war in 2004, when Westpac lost market share.

Ms Sherry fronted up to the market, at a meeting of analysts, and accepted blame – an unlikely admission from a chief executive these days.

"People know when things aren't right," she says. "You are better off admitting the mistake, and working on the problem, otherwise people will think you are a liar. There was no dressing it up – we made a mistake."

I ask her if she thinks the bad publicity about the mortgage war may have affected her chances of becoming Westpac's Australian chief executive when David Morgan retires at the end of this year.

"It could have, yeah. But at the end of the day it is not an issue I control, so it is not an issue I angst about."

But when I ask if she actually wants the job, she is silent for a moment, then lets fly with her trademark laugh. "Well, if you are offered a job, that's when you would decide if you want it."

So would she be willing to hop into the political saddle? In the three days I spent with her, the only time she became uncomfortable was when this subject was raised. She folded her arms into a defensive position across her chest.

"There is almost an indenture system in Australia with politics where you have got to come up through the ranks," she says, deflecting the question. "John Key, who has become the leader of the National Party here after being a really successful merchant banker offshore, decided that he wanted to come back to New Zealand and that he was interested in engaging in politics. He got a seat, he got a run and a couple of years later he is the leader of the party."

She has been working in a country where the prime minister is a woman, as are the chief justice and the chief executives of numerous corporations. Her take is that being a small economy "not reliant on digging stuff from the ground", New Zealand cannot afford to ignore talent.

"There is an issue in New Zealand about being the best that you can be," she says. "It cannot afford to be closed to Maori success and it cannot afford to be closed to Polynesian success and it cannot afford to be closed to women." Australia, she believes, is still pretty much a closed shop both for women in business and women in politics.

Later, she sends an e-mail saying she is "too long in the tooth" for a career in politics.