Dean Jacqui: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Dean Jacqui: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6235] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Otago) 
: 
 National does support this Climate Change Response Amendment Bill and I note that my colleague Mark Blumsky has just clarified National’s position throughout the select committee consideration of this bill. I think it is worth restating that although this bill goes some way towards addressing climate change climate change response is a little more complicated than sequestering carbon through forestry plantation. 
It is also worth noting again that in the 1990s we had something like 60000 hectares of forest planting per annum and a robust export industry for forestry yet in this Government’s tenure of 7 long years forestry planting has dwindled to practically nothing. So I think it is worth noting that sequestration is very important but I would ask whether that is it for the Government’s policy on climate change—a bill that was regarded to be so unimportant that it sat at the bottom of the Order Paper for 15 long months and that for its select committee process had four members who are no longer in Parliament. We have to wonder how urgently this Government actually views climate change. 
The Prime Minister talks about carbon neutrality because of course climate change is terribly fashionable at the moment. It is also terribly convenient for the Government because it thinks it gives it an opportunity to “get out of jail” and to get out of some tight political corners of its own making. But I think the Government’s own record on climate over the past 7 years shows that it is tracking backwards in dealing with climate change issues. Although I have mentioned that the amount of forestry planting being done has gone backwards there are also some other indicators of this Government’s poor record on climate change. 
Although the Minister in the chair David Parker has some lofty words about how we have some consensus I also note that Nick Smith National’s environment spokesman and an excellent colleague of mine wrote to the Minister responsible for Climate Change Issues offering to work in a more consensual manner. So far he is still waiting for a reply—some 7 8 or 9 months after he wrote the letter. National recognises that climate change policy needs to last longer than the term of any Government which is why we are supporting this bill. It is the only initiative from the Government that remotely makes any sense. Of course as has been mentioned several times throughout this debate—but I think it is worth mentioning again—there is also National’s excellent blue-green vision for the future which has been embarrassingly well received in meetings up and down the country. 
Eric Roy 
: They mentioned it at their conference. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: It was mentioned at the Labour Party conference—well there we are. National’s  
A Bluegreen Vision for New Zealand 
 environment discussion paper featured largely at the Labour Party conference at which the Prime Minister talked about carbon neutrality. 
So let us look at the Government’s record because talk is fine but we should really look at the record. In the time of this Government—7 years—we have had a threefold increase in power produced from coal. I say to the Minister that I am looking forward to seeing a policy for the generation of energy as is much of the generating sector in New Zealand. It is interesting is it not that when the Minister was a local MP he not only blocked Project Aqua but sat very firmly on the fence of Project Aqua. During the last 7 years we have had the Government blocking the Hobson hydro power scheme—a renewable power scheme—over on the West Coast. At the same time we have had the Marsden B refinery go from petrol to coal which is a mighty step backwards and is a record that would be hard to be proud of. And of course the Government has commissioned the Whirinaki power plant which is an oil-fired power plant. 
Last week I was at a lunch in Oamaru my home town at Gillies foundry. Gillies foundry has been a major manufacturing company in Oamaru for probably a number of years—up to a hundred I suspect. At the relaunch of this company which the Minister of Energy attended the manager of the new Gillies manufacturing plant commented that it had a bright future in manufacturing for irrigation and other initiatives. The company’s main concern was competition with China and that concern was several fold. One concern was that China could produce manufactured items such as pipes valves and various other items much more cheaply and could import them into New Zealand cheaper than the factory in Oamaru could produce them. The manager’s major concern with competition with China was that China is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol. I would love the Minister to tell the Committee how the Kyoto Protocol can be a good policy for the future of New Zealand when we are having to compete and trade with non - Kyoto Protocol signatory partners.  
Our commitment to climate change needs to be more than carbon sequestration. We support this bill—with amendment—because it makes some sensible changes on carbon sequestration but we must also make an honest attempt to reduce carbon emissions. Sequestering carbon emissions through forestry is fine but we must make an honest attempt to reduce carbon emissions and I do not see anything in the Government’s plans to address that issue. However it is addressed in National’s blue-green vision for the future.  
The answer to reducing carbon emissions does not lie in clobbering farmers. It does not lie in clobbering our export industries. I say to the Minister that we need to remember that we are in fact global citizens. We cannot shut ourselves off from the rest of the world and smugly think that carbon neutrality will do the deal because it will not. I would like to know how the Government plans for us to aim for carbon neutrality without stuffing up our economy because I fear that that is what it means. Thank you Mr Chairperson. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to. 
Bill to be reported with amendment presently.