Robertson Grant: Antarctica (Environmental Protection: Liability Annex) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Antarctica (Environmental Protection: Liability Annex) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7085. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour): It is interesting to follow on from Mr Hayes who did actually completely fail to answer Phil Goff’s question of exactly why it is that the Antarctica (Environmental Protection: Liability Annex) Amendment Bill having gone through the select committee deliberation under Mr Hayes’ excellent chairmanship of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee languished on the Order Paper for another 3 years.I note that the Order Paper currently contains 12 bills that have been sitting there for at least 2 years. It is just plain poor management. Mr Hayes tried to suggest that this is the kind of thing that might have happened under a Labour Government. That is not true. Michael Cullen worked very hard to ensure that bills made their way through in a timely manner with the exception I might say of the trout bill which did stay on the Order Paper for many years—with that exception. This National Government has shown a consistent lack of ability to make progress on legislation and this bill is a very good example of that.All parties in this House I am sure will support this bill. It has at its heart an important part to play in the goal of protecting and preserving Antarctica its critical role in our planet and its critical role in our part of this planet. What this bill does is ensure that where there are activities that may give rise to emergencies there is a process in place for notification of that and that there is an appropriate response when people fail to do what they need to do in terms of both preventing emergencies and notifying about them. It is the kind of legislation that clearly we need to pass in this House. People listening to both the Minister of Conservation and John Hayes might get the impression that this Government has a strong and resolute commitment to New Zealand’s role in protecting and preserving the Antarctic.Kris Faafoi: Smoke and mirrors.GRANT ROBERTSON: It is as my colleague Kris Faafoi says smoke and mirrors. Fundamentally other countries in the world look towards New Zealand as a leader on the Antarctic. They do that not only because of our proximity to the Antarctic but because New Zealand has traditionally taken that leadership role. We have taken seriously our job to promote quality legislation in the environment and to show that we have a real commitment. I have to question that level of commitment. John Hayes said that New Zealand wants to be a country that pulls its weight globally on environmental issues. Well what is happening right now in Doha where climate change negotiations are under way and New Zealand is day after day being pilloried for its lack of leadership?Charles Chauvel: The “Fossil Award”.GRANT ROBERTSON: As Charles Chauvel says I think for 3 days now that the “Fossil Award” at those negotiations has gone to New Zealand. Craig Foss puts histhumb up and says he is delighted. That is the National Party’s level of commitment to New Zealand’s international reputation and that is—Kris Faafoi: He’ll be fossilised soon.GRANT ROBERTSON: He is a fossil—do not worry. That is the level of commitment this Government has to international environmental issues. We now have a Government that is at these negotiations and is thumbing its nose at a future global climate change agreement when that is what people look to New Zealand for.Mr Hayes also said that our clean green reputation is important. Why then is this Government constantly undermining that in international fora? It is not only at the climate change negotiations where it is disgraceful that New Zealand has backed away. Mr Key said that he did not want us to be a leader in climate change. He wants us to be a fast follower. Well now we are a disinterested bystander at these negotiations. That is not good enough.If we come back to the Antarctic specifically what we saw during the recent Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources negotiations was that the actions from the Government from New Zealand were frankly too little too late. If we actually are going to have true commitment to the Antarctic and true commitment to protecting the environment we needed to be much more decisive and aggressive in our commitment to ensuring that there was an agreement around the Ross Sea region.Finally after a significant length of time the New Zealand Government decided that it would get alongside the US with its proposal on the marine protected area there but it was simply too little too late. We cannot afford both for the health of the Antarctic and for our international reputation to take so long to make our commitments in this area be it in terms of the marine protected area or be it in terms of passing legislation such as this bill. It is our obligation as a country that has such close links with the Antarctic to be at the head of the pack not lagging behind letting legislation sit on the Order Paper or not proposing and actively working to find a good constructive solution in terms of the Ross Sea region and the marine protected area there.We know the significance of the Antarctic to New Zealand in terms of our commitment to the environment. There is also a strong commitment for us in terms of the work that is done by New Zealand out of Christchurch and to ensure that we retain our reputation as a staunch defender of the Antarctic we need to do significantly better than we have in terms of the legislation that is in front of us now.The level of commitment that New Zealand shows to the Antarctic is something that over the years we have been proud of and I just caution against this Government seeing our role in the Antarctic as something that it can continue to provide a flippant kind of leadership towards. We need it to be far more decisive.On the subject of climate change and its relationship to the Antarctic—Mr Hayes alluded to this as well—there is nowhere on our planet where the effects of climate change are more obvious than the Antarctic. This Government’s lack of leadership on climate change its undermining of the emissions trading scheme and its failure to take a role at the international level that I think most New Zealanders would see as appropriate continues to undermine the health of the Antarctic which in turn undermines the health of our planet. If the National Government cannot get its head around the importance of taking decisive action on climate change then it cannot stand in this House and say that it has a commitment to the protection and preservation of Antarctica.So on this side of the House we are happy to support this bill. We believe that it has been a long time coming and we want to see more decisive action from this Government on Antarctica. I actually think there is willingness across the House to domore in terms of our relationship if the Government is prepared to take a leadership role but having a bill like this sit on the Order Paper for 3 years is completely unacceptable and shows a lack of commitment from this Government on those issues.