Carter David: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
Carter David: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:18128] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 I will be speaking specifically to new sections 177A and 177B in “Subpart 4—Agriculture” of new Part 5 inserted by clause 43 in Part 1. But before I speak specifically to them I want to make some general comments. This is the most far-reaching piece of legislation we have seen in the House since the reforms of the 1980s and I think it is totally irresponsible for any members of this Parliament to go through the Ayes lobby and vote for this legislation unless they can put their hands on their hearts and say they actually understand the implications of it. 
I sat through most of the process at the Finance and Expenditure Committee and I have to say that even as we deliberated the officials were telling the members of the committee more and more about the detail of how this legislation will ultimately work. What we are seeing today are not the thousand amendments that were presented by the officials at the select committee but an additional 750 amendments that have been put on the Table in the last day or so. We are seeing legislation that no member could say he or she completely understands. If we get it wrong we put the whole of New Zealand agriculture at risk. 
I am talking quite specifically about a relatively small section of Subpart 4 and it has to do with the effect of this legislation on the New Zealand agricultural industry. I do not fully understand the implications and I defy anybody in the Chamber including the Minister in the chair David Parker to explain it in enough detail for us to understand it. If we get it wrong we will simply move agricultural production from New Zealand to somewhere offshore. Charles Chauvel laughed about this at the select committee and he continues to laugh about it today. But I say to that member that the future of New Zealand agriculture is something that certainly worries me. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: No; he’s laughing at you. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: He is not laughing at me. If he thinks he is laughing at me then I am certainly not offended. But if the member gets it wrong those who will be offended are those who are involved in New Zealand agriculture. 
New Zealand farmers are not arguing in the main that they should be exempt. What they are asking for is an emissions trading scheme that is in synchrony with other overseas producers particularly Australia. They are asking for a scheme that does not simply move production from New Zealand to somewhere else in the world that does not impose the same sorts of impediments and costs. If we get it wrong then what will happen is that we will simply move production from New Zealand to other countries. 
Some tremendously good work has been done by Professor Caroline Saunders amongst others at Lincoln University who categorically proves to me that the systems of production in New Zealand are actually more carbon efficient that most of those in other parts of the world. So if David Parker as the Minister and other members of the Labour Government get this wrong we will simply have moved production out of New Zealand to a country like Uruguay. We will actually do nothing positive for global warming. In fact we risk doing exactly the opposite. 
So I say to the Committee today that this is a very serious issue. It is one that should not have been ignored through the select committee process. It is one that should have been answered to the satisfaction of the members of Parliament who sat on that select committee. In many cases the officials when we questioned them were unsure of how this particular section would work. There was huge debate in the committee about the point of obligation. Would it be with the individual farmer? Would it be at the processor level? No one was able to accurately tell me as a member of the select committee what the ultimate financial implications for the farmers of New Zealand would be. We got a range of figures but suffice it to say that for the debate at this stage those figures were scary to the financial viability of particularly our sheep and beef sector. I think the Minister should rise and tell us how much this will cost the New Zealand farmer.