Baldock Larry: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Baldock Larry: Resource Management (Energy and Climate Change) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11410] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I begin first by thanking the officials for their assistance throughout the passage of this legislation. They have worked very hard for us. I also thank fellow select committee members who at times engaged in vigorous debate as we worked through these issues. 
The speaker before me said there were some serious issues that needed to be addressed. He presented a very good argument and was able to eloquently and entertainingly put forward some statistics but I would not like to rest my future on his statistics. He admitted that there were some serious issues but did nothing to address them at all. United Future will support the third reading of this bill because we support renewable energy use. We think it is sensible. We think it should be promoted in New Zealand. It makes good sense. 
We support the efficient use of energy. This bill makes some progress in encouraging that in New Zealand and we think that is worthy of support. We also support common-sense planning for the potential climate change effects that could come. No one is trying to say that we know everything that will happen. No one would have predicted the storms that have hit this country this year. I think the speaker before me admitted that there were some serious climate issues around the world and it is sensible for us to do what we can to prepare for that. For that reason United Future will support this bill. 
This bill is not the Kyoto Protocol bill. That legislation was passed through Parliament earlier in our term and United Future clearly opposed signing up to or ratifying the Kyoto Protocol because we do not believe it is an appropriate response to the serious issues that face us. But this bill is something entirely different. It is a common-sense moderate approach to some of those issues and we will be supporting the third reading. 
This bill will not save the planet. No one is trying to suggest that it will but it will move us in a sensible direction and help us with our policy here. First this bill requires that local councils plan for the effects of climate change and we believe that with some appropriate guidance from the Climate Change Office councils will be able to do that sensibly throughout the country. If we do some serious planning for those issues now it may result in the saving of property in the future and potentially even the saving of lives. We are happy to support that. 
Second this bill attempts to level the playing field with regard to renewable energy projects. We believe that is a good thing to do. It is not always easy to get consent for renewable energy projects because they often affect the communities in which they are located. This bill seeks to give a bit of assistance in that process—not really an advantage but simply a levelling of the playing field—so that they will be able to compete and get the consents they need in order to deliver New Zealand more energy on a renewable basis. We think that is good. 
We also welcome the fact that the bill no longer requires that regional councils take note of the effect of the discharge of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. That is good news. It may not be what the Government entirely intends and it certainly is not what the Green Party wanted from the bill—which is why Jeanette Fitzsimons tried to move her amendment in the Committee stage yesterday. She thought it would be tied to the carbon charge and therefore the two would come into effect at the same time. We do not believe that regional councils should ever have been taking note of the effect of greenhouse gas emissions and we are glad to see that this bill will remove that requirement. 
This bill creates a window of opportunity for us in New Zealand. It could be a very long window depending on how long it takes the Government to complete its climate change proposals. We hope it will eventually alter its strategy and recognise that the emission of greenhouse gases is not the most pressing thing that faces us as a nation and that we should be looking at alternative forms of energy that might have greenhouse gas emissions but save some other environmental situations we have in our country. 
A year ago I went to Europe to look at some of its energy production. I was astounded to find that Europe relies a great deal on waste-to-energy. It incinerates a great deal of its waste and turns it into energy and I welcome the fact that this bill may remove one further impediment to that process being developed in New Zealand. 
I know that there are companies that have some very good proposals for how they could deal with the waste we produce. In fact we produce so much waste in New Zealand that it could almost be called a renewable energy resource. It is something we seem to develop every year and is not likely to go away. I have seen reports where companies have suggested that we could build three plants in New Zealand and incinerate all our waste after recycling as much as we can from it. Those plants could incinerate most of our waste generate 300 megawatts of electricity for us and get rid of those unsightly landfills around the country that do no good for anybody. 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: They need a bit more vision— 
LARRY BALDOCK 
: Yes the member is right. It is still not a lost cause. The technology is much improved even since the Meremere days and it is something I believe we should look at very seriously. Three plants located around the nation would take care of our waste and generate 300 megawatts of electricity for us. 
When I was in Germany I also looked at a sewage treatment plant that incinerates its sludge after completion of the treatment process and is able to generate 80 percent of the energy needed to run the plant. Now we just would not get a consent for that under the current requirements because of the greenhouse gas emissions that would come from it. But New Zealand does have a problem with sewage sludge because we do not know what to do with it. For a while there we started spreading it around the garden thinking it was good fertiliser until we found out what was in it and its concentrations of dioxin. 
I think it is excellent that perhaps we now have an opportunity to see some of that technology brought into New Zealand or developed here. We have the expertise here and some of our sewage treatment plants might be able to look at adding on incineration to get rid of the sludge and produce energy for the nation as well. 
Perhaps now that greenhouse gas emissions will not be considered we may also be able to look at coal-fired generation which I believe is something that we should be doing in New Zealand as well. I have to congratulate the Associate Minister for Energy Harry Duynhoven because while we were here yesterday debating furiously about this bill and talking about coal a great deal he was up the road actually opening a fantastic plant that is a pilot project in coal. Apparently it was also started with $6 million from the Government to CRL Energy for which I commend the Government. 
This is the beginning of the kind of technology we need in New Zealand where coal can be burnt efficiently and in an environmentally safe way. Ultimately it may lead to technology able to sequester carbon dioxide and we will be able to burn coal without any effect at all as far as greenhouse gas emissions go. So I commend Harry Duynhoven. He may have a broken arm at the moment but he was quicker than the rest of us—he was up the road doing something effective for New Zealand in opening a plant that will be of great benefit to us. 
The Kyoto Protocol as I said earlier is pretty much dead and buried and we welcome that. The speaker for the Greens Jeanette Fitzsimons said that 10 years ago some of the best minds in the world got behind this protocol and developed it. It just escapes her attention that some of the best minds in the world live in Australia the US and Russia and they have rejected this strategy as a means of addressing the concerns that face the world. Initially perhaps the Russians saw it as a bit of a windfall but they have since realised that if they want a developing economy signing up to the Kyoto Protocol could be the worst thing they ever do. 
But as I said earlier we do not support this bill because it is the “Kyoto Bill”—we support it because it is a common-sense sensible strategy. It has some advantages for us in New Zealand. It is not the entire answer but United Future will be happy to support it in its third reading and then address our attention to other important matters for the nation. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Before I come to your point of order Mr Carter I would just remind members that throughout this debate there has been reference to a certain member in the House—good-natured of course. I ask members to please remember their obligations to the guidelines on the correct address for members in this House. It was good-natured so I did not want to pull the speakers up. 
Debate interrupted.