O'Rourke Denis: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: 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:11369. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): New Zealand First will also support this bill because it is acceptable as far as it goes and in fact it does not go very far. I accept what James Shaw has just said and the figures that he gave. In particular the less than 1 percent contribution that it will make by 2020 to New Zealand’s emissions profile is very sobering. The reality is that the bill simply brings to an end a transitional provision that has come to the end of its useful life and should probably never have been there in the first place. So this is hardly the leap forward that some members opposite me here tonight have said it is.Today’s Budget actually is overall best described I think as a “band-aid Budget”—a boring band-aid Budget at that. It is a boring band-aid Budget. The protests from the other side of the House are not appropriate because that is how the people of New Zealand will see this: a boring band-aid Budget. This bill is the smallest band-aid in the package that is put forward in this pathetic Budget. In fact this particular measure could hardly be smaller and could hardly be more minor. New Zealand First actually has little faith altogether in the effectiveness of the emissions trading scheme (ETS) as a means of genuinely addressing New Zealand’s climate change obligation now committed to as a result of the Paris accord. We know that as a result of that accord what we need to do now is urgent and what we need to do now must be comprehensive. That is the obligation we have and that is what many people expect from the Government but so far it is just this very minor pathetic little band-aid measure.If the ETS is to have any chance at all in making any contribution to the Paris obligations then of course this bill is necessary as an extremely minor less-than-one step forward to phase out the unfortunate transitional one-for-two surrender obligation measure of 2009 from the emissions trading scheme so that realistic pricing can ultimately be achieved. That is what the original measure did; it actually put a block on that. This will help to free that situation up so that at least we will get a move towards realistic pricing.The reason however why this bill is just one of the minor bandages in this band-aid Budget—a very minor step forward—is that it is actually hugely outweighed by several very large steps backwards that this Government is currently involved in. These include first of all a failure to act at all in any genuine way towards taking real steps to carry out our Paris obligations. The target as the Minister said is 30 percent below 2005 emissions by 2030. That is a fairly big bite for New Zealand to take and I am glad that we are making that attempt but if we are going to get there we actually have to do something about it and all we hear from the Government is that it is planning to plan for it—planning to plan for it. That is pathetic. The Minister gave no indication of any real steps to be taken at all while at the same time there is a failure to act to reduce dependence on fossil fuels in New Zealand apart from a rather pathetic package announced by Simon Bridges recently to encourage the take-up of electric cars that was universally regarded as pathetic and inadequate.In addition to that there is no encouragement for New Zealand freight to move from clogged roads towards an underutilised and under-maintained New Zealand railway system. That is pathetic as well. In fact all we have got in this Budget is a very minor $190 million tranche of funding for rail in the near future. That is an absolute drop in the bucket compared with the huge programme of reinvestment that is needed to reinvigorate New Zealand rail and to make it competitive with the road transport industry. So those are the steps backward. That is the neglect that this Government is guilty of at the same time as it takes this extremely minor band-aid step forward.New Zealand First’s climate change policy seeks a much more comprehensive strategy than that. Planting trees can help and we would certainly encourage that but it will never be enough. We think that transport is the first major area that New Zealand needs to be taking as a step towards achieving its Paris obligations but we are getting nothing from the Government about that—nothing other than a pathetic $190 million provision for New Zealand rail in the current Budget.We all know—every party and every person in this country—that agriculture is the emissions area that must be addressed early and comprehensively by New Zealand if we are to have any hope at all of meeting our targets. For that we need a strategy-based approach based on good research. People—farmers and others involved—will need to know the actions they can actually take as a result of Government leadership and Government investment and research so that real and effective measures can be taken as far as agricultural emissions are concerned. This is New Zealand’s most critical and urgent matter as far as the need for action on climate change is concerned but we are getting nothing at all from this Government other than this pathetic measure.New Zealand First wants a much more strategic approach with clear targets backed by a comprehensive raft of regulation so that we get a level playing field and so that we get a science-based approach that will be effective for New Zealand business and New Zealand agriculture. That has to be done in consultation with them. That has not happened either as a result of Government inaction and it does need to happen.New Zealand First will support this pathetic little bill which is necessary but what we wanted to see and what New Zealanders want to see from the Government is much much better leadership and real and effective actions—real and effective actions—and genuine plans strategies and targets towards achieving New Zealand’s Paris obligations for climate change. I hope that in the future we will see that and I hope that we will hear from Government members opposite something better than we have heard so far in their speeches something that will indicate some genuine commitment and some real actions rather than just a pathetic little bill like this.