Simpson Scott; Parker DavidHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Notwithstanding the very excellent questions posed by my colleague the member for East Coast Bays Erica Stanford the Minister in the chair is responsible for this package of Estimate's debates which does include climate change. There was some discussion at the select committee about the relative merits of at some future point separating climate change responsibilities in terms of Cabinet responsibility away from this environment package. So the Minister should be in a position to answer questions relating to the climate change portion of this Estimates debate and this appropriation hearing.It's on that note that I want to ask a question about the Green Investment Fund. At the time we had the hearing some 560 days after the formation of the Green Investment Fund there had been not one single investment made. There had been lots of international travel there had been the setting up of a lavish and well decorated and furnished building and office facility in central Wellington and there had been a lavish grand cocktail party—an opening—but no single investments. And then the very day after I think it was that the select committee heard from the climate change Minister a modest announcement was made of a $15 million investment to CentrePort in Wellington. And my question to the Minister in the chair is why did it take the Green Investment Fund so long to make even a modest investment? And why was it that CentrePort was the chosen recipient of the funding when the Ports of Auckland has essentially done exactly the same thing but using their own funding stream? Here we have a situation where the Wellington port company or CentrePort is the beneficiary and the recipient of Government largesse and an investment from the Green Investment Fund but other ports around the country essentially decarbonising their operations have not been so privileged to receive that kind of investment funding and they're doing it off their own bat. I'm keen to know why.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Mr Chairman the Minister for Climate Change James Shaw I think told the committee and I can confirm that the experience of creating other green investment funds around the world is that it does take some two years to set up the institution and make the commercial arrangements necessary to begin making investments. As the member who has just taken his chair the Hon Scott Simpson has recorded since the select committee met the first investments have been approved.In terms of transformative investments that are being advanced in coming years I was with the Minister for Energy and Resources on Sunday when we announced a feasibility study into a project to consider creating a giant battery in Lake Onslow taking water from the Clutha River pumping it up into an enlarged Lake Onslow and releasing it back through a hydro generation facility and thereby creating both dry year reserve and reserve against the intermittency which would help decarbonise New Zealand's electricity reduce reliance on Huntly which produces our most expensive electricity and would also lead to a future many billions of dollars over the years of investment in intermittent renewables which are likely to be the key to the decarbonisation of New Zealand's economy more broadly including in industrial heat and transport. That feasibility study will look at alternatives but I think could make a huge difference to the energy and environmental future of our country.Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Just sort of following on from matters generally relating to climate change the Budget documents indicate that in the preceding financial year a sum of over $400 million was received by the Government in terms of the emissions trading scheme (ETS) contributions that went into the consolidated fund. That was at a point when the carbon price was kept at $25 dollars and since the changes that this Government has introduced to the ETS have been promulgated a carbon price today I think I had a look was in excess of $33 a tonne. So the funding stream that will eventually find its way into the Government consolidated fund is going to grow and even more so potentially when the trigger point that will get the cost containment reserve triggered is likely to occur if carbon gets to $50 dollars a tonne. What I'm keen to know from the Minister is: what's his view about how that money should be invested? Should it be hypothecated should it go into the consolidated fund or should it be ring fenced in his view for other items that relate specifically to carbon emission reduction?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Those decisions are for a future Government. We haven't taken those decisions. From the point of view of Treasury the remission of or exercising the emitter's right to use the fixed-price option and pay the Government who then takes on the emissions liability—from the point of view of Treasury there's a future liability for the Crown to take responsibility for those emissions that were previously the responsibility for the emitter. So Treasury would disagree that all that money should be remitted on emission reducing projects. But those issues will need to be considered in the future.