Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8394] 
6.  
JILL PETTIS (NZ Labour—Whanganui) 
 to the  
Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change 
: What reports has he received about when and why the Kyoto Protocol will come into force internationally? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Convenor Ministerial Group on Climate Change) 
: 
 The protocol will come into force when Russia has ratified it. I am advised that the current expectation amongst observers of the process is that Russia will confirm its position soon. 
Jill Pettis 
: Is New Zealand’s commitment to international cooperation on climate change in any doubt internationally? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: No not under this Government. However under a future Government it could be. For example the National Party currently has at least three positions on Kyoto: to pull out in the second commitment period— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister gave an answer and he did not need to add to it in that way. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If that part of the answer is not ruled out can the Minister be allowed to go on and finish it? I am sure he was going to say that the ACT party has been quite consistent. We have never been in favour of— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. That was a good try for a Thursday afternoon but the member knows that that is not a matter for a point of order. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House to state very clearly to the House National’s position on the Kyoto Protocol. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to state that position. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: What is the Minister’s response to the published reports and models of the international climate change panel of scientists which show that even if the Kyoto Protocol is fully implemented by all nations in the year 2100—97 years from now—any human-induced enhanced greenhouse effect will be reduced by only 5 years from what would have been the case had the Kyoto Protocol not been in force and why does the Minister not conclude as I do that the protocol is unfair is damaging to economies and will not work as the panel of scientists says itself? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There are three questions there. The Minister may answer two. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: That same report states that in the next 100 years the temperature rise throughout the globe will be somewhere between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius. In other words this is the most serious environmental problem that New Zealand and the world face—the most serious. If the member says that because the Kyoto Protocol cannot do everything it should not do anything I would say that I strongly disagree with that Luddite approach to life and I strongly disagree with ACT’s position on climate change in general. ACT is absolutely convinced that climate change does not happen whereas the report of the panel of scientists that the member reads from indicates that it certainly is happening. 
Hon David Carter 
: Does the Minister still stand by the O’Hara report which stated that the agricultural industry contributes only $800000 to climate change research—a report he described as “expert assessment”? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: That report was signed off by Jeff Grant and myself as a comprehensive report. The O’Hara report is the first such report that has been made in the country. What is happening now is that a science plan is being drawn up and that plan is looking at the research in closer detail to see whether the exact amount of science called for in the O’Hara report is needed. 
Jill Pettis 
: Will the Minister please advise the House how this Government’s approach to international climate change negotiations compares with the approach taken by previous administrations? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: This Government’s approach to international negotiations has built on the excellent work done by previous National Governments which signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiated New Zealand’s Kyoto Protocol target and insisted—indeed made it “a bottom line” for negotiation—that the protocol should cover agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions.