Graham Kennedy: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGraham Kennedy: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11371. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green): The stated purpose of this bill is to amend the Climate Change Response Act 2002. The stated purpose of the Climate Change Response Act 2002 is to enable New Zealand to meet its international obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The stated purpose of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is to stabilise carbon concentrations in the atmosphere within a time frame that will prevent dangerous climate change. It is demonstrably clear that the logical flow of those stated purposes will not be met by this puny bill before us on climate change.The Government members across the floor in receipt of their notes which were handed out just before the speech have used the following phrases designed to capture the hearts and minds of the voting public: “get the balance right” “pragmatic sensible Government” “balanced measures” and “policies right for the times”. The balance is not right it is not pragmatic and it is not sensible. It is imbalanced when it comes to climate policy and it surely is not right for the times that a quarter of a century after the UN framework convention we have these baby steps as Megan Woods put it—baby steps removing a one-for-two obligation set up “as a transitional measure” to quote the bill to get businesses through tough times from the global financial crisis in 2008 and 2009 and then it was continued in 2011.If the purpose of this Government’s climate policy is to calibrate policy in a way that businesses particularly do not feel any obligation to move in reducing carbon whether it is the global financial crisis or the new crisis in 2 or 3 or 4 years’ time it will by definition not succeed. It is not pragmatic. Let me assure members that your policies colleagues will lose jobs will hurt businesses and will hit the families—the three objects that you state the Government’s policies are designed not to do.The global emissions in that period of time have increased from 32 billion tonnes to 50 billion tonnes a year. New Zealand’s emissions over that time have increased from 67 million tonnes to 83 million tonnes or so. Since this Government took over they have increased by 19 percent. Why have they increased by 19 percent? It is because of those transitional measures taken in 2009; because of the switch from a one-for-one obligation to a one-for-two obligation in 2009; because of an insistence on continuing with free allocations subsequent to 2009 resulting in 65 million units being freely allocated; and above all because of the insistence this blind devotion against all logic—as was pointed out to Ministers through question time for 6 years—to insist on allowing the hot air coming into New Zealand by way of credits emission reduction units from Ukraine Estonia and Russia which reduced the international price from $20 to 45c.Yesterday—and I will finish on this if I may—we were assured by the Minister that only 26 percent of the credits surrendered were of those and that the rest “had environmental integrity”. So we are at the moment under the Government only 26 percent corrupt in our policies.