Willis Nicola; Dean JacquiNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): The National Party supports the emissions budgets proposed in this motion today and we do so based on our proud history of making responsible commitments to reduce New Zealand's emissions in line with our global obligations. We were the Government that signed up to the Paris Agreement. We were the party that worked across the House to support the zero carbon bill and to support the emission reduction that those two agreements imply. We support the nationally determined contributions under the Paris climate agreement and we support the targets set under the zero carbon Act. So the discussion that New Zealand is having as a country about climate change is not one in which we debate whether or not action is required. The debate we are having is how we best take action and what the steps are that will best achieve our emission reduction goals in a way that is both economically responsible and takes our people with us. National can see the very clear moral and environmental imperative for global emission action and global emission reduction; we see that very clearly. We are all on this side of the House conscious of our children and grandchildren and the world that they will inherit and we feel a conservative urge to conserve those resources which the world has today so that we can sustain our livelihoods into the future. We also see very clearly the economic and trade imperative for New Zealand to be doing its bit as part of these global efforts. We are very conscious that our trading partners are watching New Zealand to see whether our actions match the rhetoric and the declarations. And we know that in the future our farmers our exporters our tourism service providers will want to rely on an international reputation for New Zealanders having taken effective and concerted climate change action. And with all of those things in mind we support sensible emission reduction. I want to be very clear however that in supporting emission reduction that does not mean that we will support every emission reduction proposal that the members opposite put on the table. Because while we support the ends in terms of the overall emission reduction that should occur in this economy we will not always agree with the means by which others suggest that we get there. The how" really matters and I propose to members of this House an analogy. If we think about the significant reforms that New Zealand has gone through in its past I would suggest to you that emission reduction decarbonising the economy is perhaps the most significant economic reform that our economy will have to go through in the coming decades. We have experienced as a country in the past what happens when economic reform is done in a way that is too fast that is too furious that doesn't take people with it. And what we have seen is that if we aren't conscious to ensure that we are fair that we are efficient that we are effective then in fact we can cause a lot of harm on the way. So we stand very proudly for a view that the way in which we reduce emissions must be done carefully and rationally. As with all Government policies and spending we need effective and efficient climate change policies and so while we agree with the goal we will not always agree on the path. We have choices about how we reduce our emissions and some choices will be better than others. We want to do what works and what works best for the climate. That means every climate change policy must be tested. We won't sign up to climate change policies on the very basis that they make for a good press release and make people feel good because we are focused on achieving goals effectively. So while we may disagree with the emission reduction plan that is released next week or elements thereof that will be because we are committed to lowering emissions in the most effective way possible and in the most responsible way possible. That means for example that we're not going to plant our way to net zero. National won't stand by and allow the country to be covered in exotic pine forests out of a sense that this is the best way to reduce emissions. Clearly it is not. We actually have to protect future generations by reducing emissions but also by ensuring we can continue to be productive producers of food because actually for the world that makes sense. It makes no sense if our farmers are unable to produce food in a sustainable low-emission way for the world because of emission reduction restrictions and then we have that food produced by other countries with a higher emission footprint or we have actually our global food stability imperilled. National wants to take a sensible approach to that.We won't in good faith support actions and policies that will raise global emissions by shipping jobs and production overseas or any policy that is prohibitively expensive. We believe that New Zealand must play its part on the world stage by taking policies and actions that deliver genuine reductions in net emissions. Anything else anything less betrays future generations actually because it takes money from taxpayers today and in the future on false pretences. Just like policies in every other area emissions policies should be robustly analysed. How many emissions will they actually reduce and is that the best use for the dollars that are committed to achieve it? We should have transparent measures for what they will achieve and we should back them up with practical credible delivery plans. Achieving these reductions in emissions will be challenging and so we owe it to New Zealanders that we can assure them that where we are taking action we are doing the things that will have the most impact and that will make the biggest difference. We continue to believe that the emissions trading scheme will be a very important part of how emission reduction is achieved. We also acknowledge that there will be a very important place for complementary policies alongside the emissions trading scheme—for example catalysing the market around networks such as in electric vehicle charging and potentially in other areas. But again these things need to be done in a way that doesn't spend excessive taxpayer dollars on things that the private market may be prepared to come on board with as well. We would point to the example of National's investment in the broadband infrastructure network whereby we effectively used Crown capital and intervention to catalyse the investment in a very effective globally world-leading broadband network. We want to take a similarly rigorous approach to investments in the climate change area. We see a hugely significant role for investment in R & D. One of the best things that New Zealand could possibly do for the global future of climate change is come up with solutions that allow farmers around the world to reduce their biogenic methane emissions. So let us lead in the research and development not lead in the wearing of hair shirts because actually that won't help stave off climate change for future generations. We also believe in planning reforms to unleash further investment in renewable and other green technologies and we do think that cutting red tape will be a big part of that. It does not escape us that the Resource Management Act today actually prevents and stifles investment in things such as wind farms. So we have to get serious about looking at the barriers that are currently in the way of good private sector adaptation and investment.When we think about how we can do more in the future we also see the need to extend the potential for carbon removal and offsets in the emissions trading scheme. Right now the emissions trading scheme recognises removal by trees but not other technologies including blue carbon carbon capture and storage carbon mineralisation and robust offshore mitigation. In principle we need to be willing to consider these forms of removals regardless of the particular technology. It's very important when we talk about climate change that we have sincere political debates and the sincere political commitment that National has made is towards meeting these targets and reducing emissions. We entirely reserve our right to have a very robust debate about how that is achieved best for New Zealanders and we look forward to that debate in the coming weeks months and years. New Zealand should learn from its history. When you make reforms you must take people with you and do it in a way that is efficient and sustainable.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Simon Court—a five-minute call."