Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:8211. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
8.  
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: What are the financial benefits from the changes to the emissions trading scheme for Maori families after 2013? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues) 
: 
 There are many benefits to Maori families. Post-2012 there will be thousands of Maori families in well-insulated and heated homes. This will have huge health benefits and will reduce their power bills as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Secondly a large number of Maori families are beneficial owners of fishing quota forestry and agricultural assets all of which will benefit financially from changes to the emissions trading scheme. Thirdly Maori are disproportionately represented in the workforce of companies such as New Zealand Steel that are in the energy-intensive area and without these changes those jobs would be at risk. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Why given that the Minister has singled out forestry has he confined the concession to an elite number of tribes and denied the rest of Maoridom—in fact the entirety of the pre-1990 forestry sector? Why is he driving a wedge between people? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The legislation that was passed by the previous Labour Government including that member put liabilities on all pre-1990 forest owners. Iwi came to me and strongly asked that those deforestation liabilities be removed for all of those forests. Our Government maintained the position that we would not do that. However separate to that there was the issue of quite specific Treaty settlements and information disclosure requirements. To avoid court proceedings we came to a pragmatic and common-sense arrangement to allow those five iwi—just the ones that were affected by that issue—to plant trees on conservation land. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Why does the Minister refer to potential liability when his own letter to Mark Solomon said that the Crown does not recognise or accept that there is a liability of any nature? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Anybody who has been involved in legal settlements would know that one says in the base of them that settling the issue is not an acceptance of fault by the Crown. That is well-practised and any member in this House with legal experience would know that it is a standard provision that is put in such settlements. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Did he advise the Maori Party before it agreed to support his emissions trading scheme that the Government would face higher fiscal costs as a result of having to cover increased emissions; what social services did he tell the Maori Party would be cut by the Government in order to meet those increased costs and is that the reason why Hone Harawira sent a letter saying that he could not possibly vote for this measure? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The premise that the member has based his question on is quite false. There is no extra cost; there is lesser income. There is lesser income from the emissions trading scheme and the key element is that of the $50 billion that his colleague talks of $40 billion is increased emissions trading scheme charges on farmers and I am not sure how that helps Maori farming interests. 
Hekia Parata 
: Tena koe Mr Speaker. What reports has the Minister received criticising the agreement with the Maori Party and are they consistent? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: In the mainstream media the Opposition are saying: “Taxpayers are being diddled for billions in a racially”— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question very specifically asked what reports the Minister had received. You have ruled previously that the reports have to be actual reports not newspaper clippings which is what the Minister went straight to in his response. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Forgive me but I am not sure of the basis of the member’s point of order at all. As I understand it this is not about the tabling of a document. The Minister was responding to a question asked. The question asked what reports the Minister had received and as I understand it that has been in order for a lengthy period of time. I do not understand the problem there. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: In reports I have received the Opposition has said that “Taxpayers are being diddled for billions in a racially preferenced deal in which the Government gave away everything and anything.” That was in the mainstream media. But in the Maori media I have heard reports that the Maori Party got diddled for a few blankets and beads. These contradictory statements from Labour will cause racial disharmony. This Government is focused on bringing New Zealand together and addressing the issues. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I ask the Hon Dr Nick Smith and the Hon Parekura Horomia to please show some respect for the fact that the Speaker has been on his feet for some time. 
Rahui Katene 
: Does he agree with the Hon Shane Jones that the initiatives for Maori announced in the new emissions trading scheme will “protect a narrow privileged southern elite”? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I am advised that in respect of the agreement we reached on forestry there are a total of 178398 beneficial owners of which less than one-third are in the South Island. That statement is about as accurate as the claim by Labour that the agreement on forestry was worth $2 billion when the officials’ advice is that it is worth one-hundredth of that amount. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I seek leave to table a statement from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment dated yesterday in which she states the amendments will pass much of the costs from polluters to taxpayers. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.