Brownlee Gerry: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:956] 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 I move  
That the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill be now read a third time 
. What a demonstration of supreme arrogance we have seen from the Labour Opposition this evening. When the  
Hansard  
record is perused it will be extraordinary to note not only the weakness of Labour’s argument but also the fact that throughout the evening Labour members had to rely on a lot of personal attacks on colleagues of mine to get them through the argument. You see I suppose for all those new members who have come into the Labour Party there is no need to be apologetic about the debacle of the last election result. Of course they will be basking in the success that they have personally enjoyed. Unfortunately this debate confirms that the Labour Party is just as arrogant and out of touch today as it was on 7 November. 
The bill deals with this very very simple problem: for decades now we have seen a neglect of the generating assets of this country which has meant that New Zealand has put itself in the position of having a less than secure electricity system. If anyone on the other side of the House wishes to argue against that proposition I ask them to just look at the recent history. In 9 years the Labour Government managed to preside over four one-in-60-year events in the electricity sector. That is not something that just happened by coincidence. It is something that happened through that Government’s very much designed neglect. 
The thermal ban is very very symbolic. It was extraordinary to hear the previous Minister of Energy David Parker argue over and over that there was no need to repeal the legislation. In essence his argument was that it had no effect anyway. When we think about it we are left with the question about what exactly the plan was that that Minister was trying to follow. The reality is that over those 9 years not only did carbon dioxide emissions from the electricity generating sector climb considerably but so did the price that New Zealanders paid at a retail level for their electricity. The people Labour claims to be so concerned about—the poor and middle-income people who struggle to pay bills at times—saw a 63 percent increase in electricity prices over the time that Labour was presiding over this portfolio. 
More than that that figure represents a two and a half times inflation for each of those 9 years. That cannot be a record that any Government would be comfortable with. The question is why that occurred. Well it is simply that Labour was too harsh in the way in which it dealt with hydro-generating applications. They were knocked over one after the other if not by the resource management process then in many cases by the Minister of Energy or a Minister inside the Government. The consequential effects were that after the crisis of 2003 with great fanfare and a huge amount of trumpeting the Government backed the development of the e3p plant at Huntly by underwriting a gas contract for Genesis Energy. That is a thermal plant built by a Government that was so committed to renewable energy. As if that was not enough the Government decided it needed to back itself up by having an emergency capacity—a capacity that would produce up to 3 percent of New Zealand’s electricity needs at tight times. So what did Labour do? It built a 150 megawatt diesel-fired plant at Whirinaki. Those were Labour’s responses to the neglect that had gone on in those early years. 
Not only that Labour decided that it had better fix the organisation of the electricity industry by putting in another committee—another body another bureaucracy—the Electricity Commission. Over the first 5 years of its existence the Electricity Commission has taken some $230 million off New Zealanders. That is over and above the 63 percent price rises and over and above the two and a half times per year inflation rise. 
Hon David Parker 
: No it’s not! 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I say to Mr Parker that it is. There we go: here is a man who has his head so far in the clouds that he does not even read his own electricity bills. That is a straight levy; it is $250 million taken straight out of the pockets of New Zealanders to set up a bureaucracy that has achieved what? We have gone from being a country that was able to generate its delivered electricity from 72 percent from renewable sources to a country that is now producing about 66 percent from renewable sources. It is a massive fall and all this has come from a party that all through this debate has said that it was all about renewable energy when it was in Government. I just find that totally totally—I cannot say the word that I would like to but I am incredulous. 
The member Shane Jones used a lot of “ous” words; he said this legislation was “ruinous” “egregious” and “circuitous”. Well I think many of those arguments could be mounted for the way the Opposition has handled this debate. Members opposite can screw up their faces all they like but they have an appalling record in this area. The barefaced facts are right there in front of them—72 percent down to 66 percent price rises of 63 percent $250 million out of the pockets of New Zealanders and this year 70 million - odd litres of diesel burnt in the Whirinaki emergency plant. That indicates that the party now in Opposition did not have a clue what it was doing in Government—not a clue. 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: You’re going to get a history lesson in a minute Gerry. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Mr Hodgson—the man who presided over the establishment of the Electricity Commission the man who made the decision to underwrite the gas contract for Genesis and the man who made the decision to build Whirinaki—says he is going to stand up in a minute and give us a history lesson. Well history lessons are interesting but they make no difference to the consumers who have to pay the price. 
I tell the House that in advancing this bill we should put a bit of a rationale into the mix for decisions that will be made by those who invest in generation in this country. Why would we want someone who is proposing a wind project to have to go cap in hand to the Minister to ask whether he or she could put in some thermal generation to back up that particular project? It makes no sense. We think those organisations are capable of making those decisions themselves. 
There will be fuel substitution as a result of this legislation passing today. I suspect a greater number of renewable projects will be advanced because although the Government talks about them and they may well be consented very few are actually in the build stage. 
This legislation simply recognises the repeated comments put before the Finance and Expenditure Committee at the time it was first considered. Those comments essentially damned the proposition. It allows the industry itself to make rational decisions about how future investment is made and this country needs a heck of a lot more of that if we are to see some curb in the outrageous price path that is the legacy of the Labour Government.