Norman Russel: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Norman Russel: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:7910. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I stand to speak on the second reading of the Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill. This bill is fundamentally about climate change and it seems that not a day goes past when the evidence around climate change does not get more alarming. In fact we would think that if we read the evidence and followed the debate around the science of climate change then if that was what drove us we would become increasingly concerned and would want to make our response to climate change stronger and stronger over time. 
Just today for example when I was scanning the papers I saw that the Antarctic ice sheet is melting faster than previously thought—for example the West Antarctic ice sheet is currently dumping about 132 billion tonnes of ice per year. One hundred and thirty-two billion tonnes of ice per year is being dumped by the West Antarctic ice sheet into the sea which is more than we had previously thought. The East Antarctic ice sheet which we thought might be accumulating ice because of the increased precipitation of snow on the surface actually appears to be dumping about 57 billion tonnes of ice per year. We are losing that ice from the East Antarctic ice sheet. The reason why this is so significant is that these ice sheets have a dramatic impact on global sea levels. The West Antarctic ice sheet by itself would result in a 5-metre sea-level rise if it were to disintegrate. 
It is against this background that we are considering a bill that will weaken New Zealand’s response to climate change. It is really quite hard to fathom that in a world where the evidence that we are changing the planet itself is increasing and strengthening and in which the science is becoming more and more compelling the New Zealand Parliament looks as if it is passing a bill today that weakens the New Zealand Government’s response to climate change. It is hard to fathom. People in future years will look back on this debate scratch their heads and wonder that at the very time when the evidence around the acceleration of human-caused climate change is gathering and when we are in the run-up to perhaps the most important conference in the history of humankind—the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen—the New Zealand Parliament should choose to weaken the response of the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand people. 
This is a time when we should be more concerned because of course the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had a very modest prediction about sea-level rise—18 to 59 centimetres by 2100—but that was premised on the basis that we could not predict what would happen with the big ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. But we know now that those ice sheets appear to be losing a lot more ice than we thought previously and they appear to be warming more quickly. We would think that in the face of science and evidence the New Zealand Parliament would look at the science strengthen its response and aim to have a more considered and stronger response on climate change. Instead the bill in front of us today is a bill to weaken our response to climate change. It is a shameful day to be a member of the New Zealand Parliament and to watch the New Zealand Parliament passing this legislation. 
It is important to remember that during the last Eemian period—128000 years ago—greenhouse gas concentrations were at about the same level as they are today but sea levels were from 5 to 7 metres higher because there is a lag in our system. There is a lag between the time we increase levels of greenhouse gases and the time we see sea levels rise. What we are looking at right now is an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere but we are yet to see the full impact of that increase in terms of melting in Antarctica sea-level rise and more extreme weather events—although already we have seen very significant extreme weather events. 
In the face of the fact that we know we have yet to see the full impact of climate change the New Zealand Parliament’s response—and it would appear to be the New Zealand Government’s response—is to weaken the ability of the New Zealand economy to reduce its greenhouse emissions. In fact we are introducing a system today where we take the “cap” out of “cap and trade”. Someone one day came up with the idea of “cap and trade” as a way to cap emissions and then allow for the most economically efficient way to reduce those emissions under that cap. But the Government has decided today to take away the cap so that we do not have a “cap and trade” system any more and to take away the fundamental driver of the price. Of course the result is that the New Zealand economy will respond by increasing greenhouse emissions. 
In New Zealand we have already increased greenhouse emissions very very significantly. Our increases are in the order of 22 percent or more since 1990 and over the course of the previous Government greenhouse emissions increased by about 14 percent. In spite of the Green Party’s efforts to constantly call on that Government to address climate change only towards the end of its term was that Government willing to address climate change to some degree. The emissions trading scheme that was brought in by Labour and the Greens in the last Parliament which was not a perfect scheme but which made some progress towards introducing a “cap and trade” system is the very scheme that we are dismantling today by taking away the cap in the “cap and trade”. 
It is hard to get our heads around the idea that this is what human beings who have spent many millions of years developing a consciousness and an ability to understand the world would do. It is hard to comprehend that the majority of members in this House today are going to vote for a system that will increase New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions at a time when the science and the evidence around the impact of climate change is building all the time. It is in fact a suicide note. What this Parliament and Parliaments in a similar situation all around the world are doing is writing a collective suicide note to future generations. We all talk about what might happen in 2100 but there are children born today who will be alive in 2100 and they will look back and curse us. They will curse the members of this Parliament and they will curse this Government for weakening our ability to reduce our greenhouse emissions. 
This is a Government that will walk into negotiations in Copenhagen with the objective of weakening the global agreement there. That is what this is all about. That is why the Government wants to get this bill in place—so it can walk into Copenhagen and try to undermine the agreement to reduce global greenhouse emissions. It is hard to get our heads around the idea that at a time when the evidence that we need to reduce our greenhouse emissions is becoming more compelling a Government would bring a bill into the House that will increase our greenhouse emissions. It is hard to understand that human beings who so value their intelligence their consciousness their science and the evidence would bring a bill into the New Zealand House of Representatives that will increase our greenhouse emissions—which is what this bill does. It is a very hard thing to understand. 
There are ethical issues associated with what we are doing today. It is the wrong thing to do to future generations. It is the wrong thing to do to children and to the people who will come after us. It is also an incredibly stupid thing to do from an economic point of view. If New Zealand wishes to be prosperous it must make the transition to a low-carbon economy. There is no other form of prosperity for New Zealand in the future. To anyone who sits here and thinks that this will all go away—which is of course what this bill hopes—and who thinks that New Zealand can somehow have a prosperous future with a high-carbon or carbon-intensive economy I say that there is no such thing. Either we have a low-carbon economy which gives us the opportunity to have a prosperous economy or we have a high-carbon economy which means we will not be prosperous. This bill will lock in investments that lock in a high-carbon economy; there is no way that we can have a prosperous economy if we lock New Zealand into a carbon-intensive economy. But this bill locks in that high-carbon economy. 
We can only hope that it is not too long before we get rid of this stupid bill. We can only hope that it is not too long before we have a carbon trading system that plays a part in putting a price on greenhouse emissions so that we can reduce our greenhouse emissions. That is the only way we can send a price signal through our economy in order to move it toward a low-carbon economy. We also need the complementary measures of State regulation and State incentives to reduce emissions. We also need all the education and individual action. But if we undermine the price signal which is what this bill does we undermine our ability to reduce our greenhouse emissions and we lumber future generations with a huge debt and a huge increase in greenhouse emissions. It is a shameful bill.