Brown Peter: Electricity Industry Reform Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brown Peter: Electricity Industry Reform Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18564. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I will also take a short call mainly to respond to some of the concerns that have been raised in the debate thus far. First of all I listened with keen intent to Chris Auchinvole. He took issue with my saying that we should have an abundance of supply. He seemed to say that we should have just enough with sufficient back-up to cover for emergencies such as low lake levels and extra demand.  
I say to the honourable member and indeed to the House that if we settle for that then we will not have a true market. A true market depends on having a surplus and on having people compete because they need the incentive to sell. If we settle for having just enough with a back-up for emergencies then we might as well go back to the old ECNZ days. Indeed as I said earlier there are people in New Zealand First who want us to look at amalgamating Genesis Mighty River Power and Meridian Energy into the old ECNZ if for no other reason than that there would be only one head office and it need not be on the waterfront in Wellington.  
It is important that a genuine effort is made by generators to sell and they must have a surplus to have that genuine incentive to want to sell their products. We are talking about trading. If I want to sell something ahead of someone else I must know that if I do not sell it somebody else will otherwise it is a monopoly-type situation.  
This bill allows lines companies to produce more generation and New Zealand First supports that principally to keep us up to speed with the amount we have right now. It is not advancing the situation. The price of electricity is a very key issue for many New Zealanders and it is important that we have a structure that keeps as much downward pressure on prices as is possible. This bill will not do that. It will simply bring a little bit more electricity on board to ensure that we do not fall over in an emergency situation.  
I want to respond to Dr Cullen. He said that nuclear power is very expensive. The fact is that the infrastructure is exceedingly expensive but as I understand it the production of electricity is relatively cheap. If we compare other forms of electricity the cost of the infrastructure is reasonable but the cost of production is reasonable also.  
The reason for this country not going nuclear is a political one and it is a reason that I agree with personally. I am not advocating for nuclear power; I am simply saying that there are New Zealanders out there who say that politicians should have a closer look at it. I am not one who supports that but I say to the House that more and more people are putting up their hands to say that we should have a closer look at it. They might well be a minority a very small minority but because of the price of electricity and because of the environmental concerns more and more New Zealanders are saying: “Please have a look at it.”  
New Zealand First supports this bill but we are not kidding ourselves. It really is a patch-up bill to keep us up to speed. It does not advance the electricity industry in this country very much at all.