Graham Kennedy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is subject to correctionGraham Kennedy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:15. Text is subject to correction.]11.Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM (Green) to theMinister for Climate Change Issues: Does he think the Government is doing enough to tackle climate change given the statement of Yeb Sano head of the Philippines delegation to the UN climate talks that “We cannot sit and stay helpless staring at the international climate stalemate. It is now time to take action.”?Hon TIM GROSER (Minister for Climate Change Issues): First of all may I reiterate—I know with the support of all members of this House—our sympathy for the people of the Philippines who have not only suffered but continue to suffer the after-effects of this tragedy. In respect of the substantive question yes I believe that this Government which is managing the only emissions trading scheme in the world outside Europe which is making a number of efforts internationally to assist the struggle against anthropogenic greenhouse gas and which is responsible for 0.14 percent of global emissions is absolutely doing its fair share at least.Dr Kennedy Graham: Will the Minister confirm to this House that combined pledges mean 54 billion tonnes of global emissions in 2020 way above the target of 44 billion tonnes guaranteeing dangerous climate change such as Typhoon Haiyan whose effects have moved Mr Sano to say: “I struggle to find words to describe how I feel about the losses and damages we have suffered from this cataclysm.”?Hon TIM GROSER: The supplementary question takes us into a very different matter of whether the international community—not the New Zealand Government which was in the primary question—is doing enough. The only answer to that can be no it is not doing enough and needs to do a lot more which is why we need progress in Warsaw next week—Hon David Cunliffe: So you’re not part of the international community any more?Hon TIM GROSER: —on a comprehensive international agreement. To reply to Mr Cunliffe directly New Zealand is doing a lot more than the vast majority of members of the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change.Dr Kennedy Graham: So if New Zealand is doing its fair share to tackle climate change why have our net emissions increased since 2009 and why do the recent projections show a 50 percent increase by 2040?Hon TIM GROSER: Well first of all our international commitment in respect of the first commitment period is overwhelmingly likely to be met. Secondly the emissions intensity of this country is increasing to be more and more carbon efficient with remarkable speed about an average of 1.3 percent on a compound average growth rate. I think we are doing pretty well.Dr Kennedy Graham: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question did not pertain to the Kyoto 1 period of 2008 to 2012. It spoke about—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I heard the question. [Interruption] Order! I heard the question. It was not as clear as that until the member in his question phrased: “if New Zealand is doing its fair share …” etc. The Minister cottoned on to that and used that as part of his answer.Dr Kennedy Graham: If New Zealand is doing its fair share to tackle climate change why have we signed up only to a paltry 5 percent reduction pledge and why are we not doing our part to stop dangerous climate change that will result in more events like the tragedy we are witnessing in the Philippines?Hon TIM GROSER: Well first of all again the underlying premise of the question which is a fair premise is about relative contribution and since more than 100 members of the United Nations have made no statement about doing anything that is the first part of my answer. The second part of my answer is that the member continues to misrepresent this Government’s position on this minus 5 percent target. This sits underneath our conditional offer to do a darned sight more namely minus 10 to minus 20 provided we are satisfied that other countries come to the party.Dr Kennedy Graham: How can we expect other countries to take the lead and reduce their emissions when we do not do our fair share and basically we are effectively freeloading?Hon TIM GROSER: By following the lead that we have just given.Moana Mackey: How can he say that we are doing more than other countries when New Zealand’s inaction is in stark contrast to the commitments made by our Pacific Island neighbours; and why did New Zealand sign the Majuro Declaration at the Pacific Islands Forum in September a statement urging countries to set more ambitious emissions reduction targets an action that led Pacific Island leaders at the forum to believe that New Zealand would come up with tougher targets than were currently in place when we clearly had no intention of doing anything of the sort?Hon TIM GROSER: Well first of all we need to examine very carefully the statements of these Pacific Island countries in terms of the underlying numbers and assumptions that they have put forward on the table. New Zealand is doing as much as any member in my opinion of the annex 1 countries. New Zealand has spent something like $600 million—I stand to be corrected on the precise number—with fast-start financing helping predominantly Pacific countries move across to renewables and lower their emissions. I think New Zealand is doing a great deal in the Pacific pursuant to that declaration.