Shearer David: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 March 2014. Volume:696;Page:16377. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert): We in the Labour Party agree with the Energy (Fuels Levies and References) Amendment Bill in the sense that we obviously believe that New Zealand should live up to its treaty obligations. We see that the need for stocking oil in sufficient amounts is important although we would prefer this to be held in New Zealand rather than offshore in Japan. Nevertheless that is beyond the remit of this bill. We do realise that that is an important part of our obligations under the Agreement on an International Energy Program—to contribute and hold within New Zealand a 90-day stock of oil. The forecast costs of the current method of meeting New Zealand’s International Energy Agency stockholding obligation the ticketing regime will not be fully funded by the existing vote appropriation. In the absence of further intervention New Zealand would therefore become non-compliant with its International Energy Agency obligations and we do not want to do that.This bill provides for the purpose of the existing petroleum or engine fuel monitoring levy to be extended so that that levy revenue can be used to meet the costs associated with the Crown’s compliance with that agreement and it removes the present maximum levy rate and provides for the levy rate on fuels to which the levy applies to be set in the case of regulations by Order in Council. Although we agree with the need for New Zealand to be compliant with our treaty obligations and we recognise why that treaty is in place and why that treaty exists in order to ensure we have stability in oil an essential commodity on which our economy and our lifestyle depends—on which pretty much every function of our life depends—we do not agree with the way that this will be collected and I want to go through the points one by one.At the moment the way that this levy this additional cost will be collected is effectively by charging motorists more at the petrol pump. There will be an increase in the amount that motorists will have to pay as a result of this levy. We just explained that having a stockpile is important to enable our ability to protect ourselves against these spikes and changes that can occur around the world. That is because we are talking about not just cars. We are talking about cars and we are talking about buses trains aeroplanes boats and everything else that oil products contribute towards. But what this Government is doing is focusing the levy solely on the motorist.Many people are finding it very difficult to fill their petrol tanks up right now. I can guarantee that there are people watching this debate tonight who will be saying: “Well it costs me $120 $130 to fill my tank up when I go to the petrol station and that is what we need to be able to do.” Well add a few more cents on to that again. This Government has continued to hike the price of petrol up. This Government has hiked the price of petrol up in order to meet its Budget surplus. It did that just before Christmas last year—in case Government members sitting over there have forgotten what actually happened. So here they are again wanting to change and shift the goalposts so that it will cost New Zealanders even more to fill their tanks up rather than funding this obligation through general taxation which has actually been the case for the last—well who knows how long. Traditionally that is how it has happened.The second reservation that we have is that it allows the energy Minister to change that rate pretty much at will. Whereas at the moment there is a maximum rate the billgives enormous flexibility to the Minister to change the rates. Therefore we do not have the scrutiny that we once had.Thirdly—and I find this sort of unbelievable—actually this levy also applies to biofuels. Why are we putting the same levy on biofuels which are part of our energy future in terms of what we want to try to be which is to be independent of the current fossil fuels?The Labour Party recognises that this bill is likely to go through and it is likely to go to the Commerce Committee. We look forward to the debate and to hearing from the industry shareholders about exactly what is going to happen. But I come back to that same point: oil is an essential commodity and we would like it to be less essential. We would like to be less dependent on it and over time we will want to transition away from fossil fuels and on to renewables. That is certainly from the point of view of the Labour Party where we want to be headed. We want to see New Zealand being 100 percent reliant on renewable energy. Certainly internally within New Zealand we believe that by 2020 we could be 90 percent there and by 2030 or 2035 we could be 100 percent focused on renewable energy in terms of what we achieve.That will go hand in hand with the developments that we will see in the future around an increasing number of electric cars and what we hope would be a roll-out of more efficient public transport that would take the reliance off cars. This Government certainly has not been supporting that. In fact the Government has embarked on an enormous road-building project rather than try to support the idea of more efficient public transport. It is for that very reason that in Auckland for example the rail loop has been put out to 2020. The year 2020 means that we will pay up to $500 million more for that rail loop and that when electrification comes on stream this year—something that the Labour Government initiated and I am pleased to see that this Government has continued with it—our trains in Auckland will be so chock-a-block that they will not be able to function because of the absence of a circular rail loop that would enable more efficient use of public transport in Auckland. So to say that this Government is behind the efficient use of public transport is obviously wrong.Coming back to the point that I started with here the way this will be funded is through an increase in people’s petrol prices. They will be paying more for the petrol that they put in their tanks. When they go to the petrol station and as many people do now they hold their breath and they get their petrol in $20 or $25 lots because they cannot afford to fill their tank right up they should remember that this Government is responsible for increasing the price of petrol in their tank again—again one more increase. Well it might not affect the people whom those members choose to represent but it does affect the people whom the Labour Party stands for. We believe that where we are going with this is wrong. Giving the Minister of Energy and Resources increased flexibility around putting the price up whenever he might choose to do that is wrong. The fact that the levy applies to biofuels an industry that we want to see more of in New Zealand is also wrong as well.Although we agree with the overall intent of the bill and we agree with the fact that the treaty obligations are important and we stand by those treaty obligations we cannot support the bill as it currently stands which is to rack up people’s petrol prices and give an energy Minister far more ability to rack prices up even further at will. We are willing to listen and to debate this in the select committee. We are interested in hearing from the various shareholder and stakeholder groups that are involved in the industry to see what they have to say. But right now as it stands we cannot support this piece of legislation.