Simpson ScottParts 1 and 2 Schedules 2 to 7 and clauses 1 to 3Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): I yield to the Minister.Hon James Shaw: I seek leave for all provisions to be taken as one debate with the questions to be put separately.Hon Members: We've already done that.Hon James Shaw: Oh I beg your pardon.Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Sorry Mr Chair I was yielding to the Minister. We've got through the procedural stuff and we're OK to go? OK. Good.Look thank you Mr Chair. This is a complicated multifaceted detailed piece of legislation. The bill itself—the document that's sitting on the Table—runs to in excess of 400 pages and so as the debate on the specific clauses and sections of the bill pursues this afternoon I and my colleagues will want to ask the Minister a number of questions about the practical application of this piece of legislation. And in so doing we are very cognisant on this side that actually this is the doing" piece of the climate change reform package that the Government has introduced. The first portion of the legislation was the zero carbon Act and that essentially set up the framework for the establishment of a commission and the various targets around time frames and gases for reduction. But this emissions trading scheme piece of legislation is the one that actually provides the Minister of the day with the levers to have an impact on the day-to-day lives of New Zealanders through a pricing mechanism that is our emissions trading scheme. And effectively that's exactly what it is: it's a piece of statute that is designed to effectively reward good behaviour and effectively punish poor behaviour in terms of carbon emissions.So that then leads to a whole range of consequential impacts not the least of which is the situation regarding the potential for much more exotic afforestation of the countryside than many people feel comfortable with. It's on that point at this stage in the debate that I'm keen to know from the Minister in the chair: does he feel that this legislation actually poses a risk to primary production particularly our export-led primary producers—in that if the carbon price is increased as his announcement yesterday indicates that it will be with the cap moving to $35 a tonne will that actually provide an incentive for further afforestation and potentially create an environment where it's financially viable and profitable for carbon farmers to plant pine trees on land that up till now has been producing grass and the associated primary products that come from sheep and beef and cattle farming?So we are on this side concerned that in the legislation there doesn't appear to be sufficient robust ability to prevent mass afforestation and that's been an issue that has been of huge concern to people in rural communities and provincial communities who are worried that in order to have this situation take place it will be their communities that are effectively depopulated and denuded in terms of effective functioning communities. And so I am keen to have that answer from the Minister. Where is it in this piece of legislation? Where is the mechanism that prevents mass afforestation in a way that can give assurance to rural and provincial communities that land that is currently in pastoral productive business won't be just planted in forests. We also want to have—and I'll take another call later on Mr Chair. I'm interested to know about the Government's general view on offsets per se. But in the meantime just initially keen to have an indication from the Minister on the point I raised."