Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Hide Rodney: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:656;Page:5671] 
9.  
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
 to the  
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: How much lower would New Zealand’s net carbon dioxide equivalent emissions be in 2020 as a result of the emissions trading scheme as currently legislated compared with the business-as-usual case represented by the green line in figure 5 in his ministry’s document  
New Zealand’s 2020 Emissions Target 
? 
Hon TIM GROSER (Associate Minister for Climate Change Issues (International Negotiations))  
on behalf of the 
Minister for Climate Change Issues 
: 
 Perhaps I should say that this answer is also on behalf of the previous Labour Government as it is its scheme to which the member is referring. Clearly a number of factors need to be taken into account. There is the issue of the price. Of course the previous Labour Government’s scheme has no cap on the price so it is an extreme market solution—let the price clear at whatever the economic and social cost may be. There are uncertainties about the extent to which the scheme would stimulate planting and uncertainties over the harvesting. But if the price were as the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research and Infometrics study indicates $100 a tonne it has been estimated that it could reduce emissions by 15 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents. It could also possibly put forward a further 50000 hectares of planting which might add a further 10 million tonnes and arguably it might decrease the very rapid deforestation that occurred in the last few years of the previous Labour Government. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am on my feet in case members had not noticed. Before I call the Hon Rodney Hide I want to say that the question that was asked was a perfectly serious question and the House deserved to hear the answer. It was a straightforward question. Obviously the answer was quite complicated. I want the House to be able to hear the answer. I am serious about that. The House deserves to hear the answer. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Opposition certainly agrees with you that we need to be able to hear the answer but I think the two issues were first the extraordinary length of the answer and second the political content from the beginning when the Minister said he was answering on behalf of the previous Labour Government. We will ignore all the other theatrics that went on but those two points alone meant it was very difficult to maintain order. If the Minister gives a shorter answer without all the political stuff I am sure he will find that he will be heard in silence. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need further assistance on the matter. I think the Hon Darren Hughes makes a perfectly good point and I would ask the Minister in responding further to avoid unnecessary political content. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: Does the Minister agree with the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research and Infometrics report that setting the price of carbon at $100 a tonne will still leave emissions 20 percent above 1990 levels but will also cost the average New Zealander 9.7 percent of his or her wages? 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: On behalf of the Minister for Climate Change Issues—and I will stop at that point to avoid introducing ironic humour yet again into Parliament—let me say that the answer to that is very straightforward: yes that is exactly correct but it is of course the result of modelling. Whether you think it is realistic depends on first what you generally think of modelling; second what you think of this particular general equilibrium modelling; and third how realistic you think the assumptions are. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I remind the Minister that the Speaker should not be involved in his answer either. Every time he says “what you think about this” or “what you think about that” he is actually referring to the Speaker. It is not helpful to the order of the House either. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: What is the projected cost to the Government if the price of carbon under the emissions trading scheme is $100 a tonne? 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: Logically of course we should defer answering this question until 2022; I am confident that the then Minister of Finance the Hon Bill English will be in a position to answer the question. We do not have an estimate from the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research study. It will be driven by a number of issues including most obviously allocation issues. I can assure the member that this Government will take an economy-wide view of that key battle. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Does the Minister stand by his answers in question time yesterday including the one in which he said he would be “flabbergasted” if New Zealand faced trade barriers as a result of being seen not to take climate change seriously? 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: I can assure the member that the Minister sticks by that comment. It is perfectly obvious that we will not face formal trade barriers because no country currently applies any form of carbon price to agriculture which is the normal issue of concern. However we need to take account of our customers. That is a more subtle and important question. 
Charles Chauvel 
: So does the Minister say that the Prime Minister was wrong to have said in a speech in Gisborne last Wednesday in respect of climate change: “If we do nothing there will be trade barriers.” and “To do nothing could mean the next generation will not have the family farm.”? 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: The Prime Minister is always right and the Prime Minister knows full well that doing nothing is not an option. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I seek leave to table a report of the speech given by the Prime Minister at the Gisborne-Tatapouri Sports Fishing Club in Gisborne on 12 August 2009. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Did the member say it is a report of the speech? 
Charles Chauvel 
: It is a report from the  
Gisborne Herald 
 of the remarks made by the Prime Minister to which I referred in my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It seems to be a press statement. Leave is being sought— 
Charles Chauvel 
: No it is not a press statement. It is a page from a very well-respected newspaper. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table the page— 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat while the point of order is being dealt with. Leave is sought to table a page from a newspaper. Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is objection.