Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:645;Page:14612] 
8.  
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister responsible for Climate Change Issues 
: Does he agree with Dr Hugh Saddler and Dr Richard Denniss in their Greenpeace report  
New Zealand’s Expanding Carbon Footprint 
 that under the Government’s proposed emissions trading scheme New Zealand will need to import $3.1 billion worth of emission permits; if not what does he believe the figure to be? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for the Environment) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister responsible for Climate Change Issues 
: No; even the report’s authors say that that is an extreme scenario. The figure Treasury currently has on its books is $962 million based on a liability of 45.5 million tonnes. As I have said the emissions trading scheme is likely to halve that figure if it proceeds in its current form. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Minister agree with the report that New Zealand’s emissions trading scheme will not deliver significant emission reductions; if he does not accept that does he think the report is wrong and how much does he believe the reductions will be from the emissions trading scheme? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The trading scheme is a way of pricing the emissions. The reductions come from the behavioural change that follows. But I must say that I welcome the member’s interest in this area given that when the bill was introduced to this House his party voted against it and he said that we should adapt to rising seas. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Is it not time the Government conceded that carbon neutrality is a pipedream and a cynical Helen Clark slogan when the Government’s 8-year record is one of huge deforestation and rapidly growing emissions and when we have organisations as diverse as the New Zealand Institute and Greenpeace all saying that under current Government policy emissions will continue to grow for at least the next decade? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: That member has been complaining about the growth of this economy ever since he has been in Opposition. It has grown it will continue to grow and we must have a trading scheme that works with that growth to reduce the growth in emissions. The member knows that and playing around the way he does with the facts does not change the situation for anyone. Even Greenpeace knows that Nick Smith has no sway in his caucus even if he believes something himself to start with. 
Rodney Hide 
: Can the Minister tell the House what the emissions trading scheme will cost the country in its first 5 years of operation and by how much it will reduce carbon emissions; if he cannot tell the House that why not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I tried to explain to the member before that it is the behavioural change that comes from the trading scheme and from a big range of other measures that the Government is undertaking in the environmental area— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: They have all failed. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member might have failed but many many projects are under way in New Zealand and internationally to make a difference to emissions. The member has to realise that it is a matter of behavioural change and could I just say to the member that a bit less hot air would probably help. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister agree with the key point made by both the Greenpeace report and the New Zealand Institute report  
Actions Speak Louder than Words 
 that New Zealand’s competitive advantage in future and our reputation will depend on our progress towards a low carbon-emissions economy in this country? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Yes. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does he then agree with those two reports that relying on purchasing most credits from overseas rather than making substantial reductions at home will damage both our economic competitiveness in the future and our environmental quality at home? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No I do not because setting up the scheme this way minimises the cost to New Zealand firms of reducing emissions and therefore it is good for the economy; also it maximises the amount of global emission reductions that are achieved for a given level of New Zealand investment. Therefore it is best for the environment. I remind the member that we are talking about global warming and what we want to do is to reduce emissions globally not just in New Zealand by the maximum amount. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Is he concerned that a number of reports including in the  
Financial Times 
 of London have shown that overseas emission reduction credits are poorly verified and often fraudulent and that a number of our trading partners are looking at the emission reductions we make at home rather than just how much we offset them by paying for somebody else to do it and will he consider a New Zealand target for emission reductions or is it just going to be more cows more coal and more cars? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: We do have already some sectoral targets in electricity and stationary energy and in transport. I think that at some stage we might get to the point of having a New Zealand target overall. My view is that that would be something that is appropriate to develop after the next round of the negotiations internationally. As to the question of the value of international credits we signed up to the Kyoto Protocol; so did a number of other countries. Given— 
Hon Member 
: Not that many. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Actually a lot of other countries have signed up— 
Hon Members 
: Who said that? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Who said “not many”? Would the member put up a hand to show his or her stupidity? No one will plead guilty. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is unnecessary. Would the Minister just address the question. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: My understanding is that it was all but two countries in the Western World and we are now down to one. Is that right? [ 
Interruption 
] Was that Anne Tolley or Heather Roy? Just to finish the question as far as Kyoto is concerned we signed up to something; so did a number of countries that are not Western countries. We did a deal with them. To back out of that deal at the moment in my view would be to back out of Kyoto and Kyoto is something we are relying on. 
Rodney Hide 
: I seek leave to table the report by Dr Saddler. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.