Mackey Moana: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — Third Reading 
Mackey Moana: Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:976] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 All the speeches we have heard from the National members so far seem to indicate that they support the moratorium on thermal generation and that they are great fans of renewable energy which leads us to ask why we are here in urgency again passing a bill that does exactly the opposite of what every single National member has argued for. There is confused then there is really confused. 
But there is one light at the end of the tunnel. I am very pleased that the member who has just resumed his seat Jonathan Young has finally realised that it was a moratorium not a ban. I am pleased about that although it has taken the entire debate for him to realise it. I am glad that he has finally appreciated that his first and second reading speeches were completely wrong— 
Chris Hipkins 
: A quick learner! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: A quick learner; well it has not taken him very long. If there is one bright point in the Electricity (Renewable Preference) Repeal Bill being rammed through under urgency with no public input maybe it is that Mr Young has finally realised that the claims he made in his earlier speeches were completely wrong. I congratulate him on standing in this House to correct the mistake he made earlier on. 
I come back to the point that if the National Party members truly do not want any more baseload thermal generation if they truly believe that renewable generation is the way of the future then why are they passing legislation that repeals exactly that? 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: In urgency. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: In urgency. The member who has just resumed his seat also questioned Labour’s commitment to renewable generation which is very ironic given that we are sitting under urgency to repeal legislation put in place by the previous Labour Government that promoted renewable generation. I do not know whether the member was confused; perhaps he had not read the bill. It is actually not very long. It would take the member only about 5 minutes to read at the very most. It is not very difficult. The member has Dr Paul Hutchison sitting right in front of him—a very learned man. He could ask him about it. He should not ask Maurice Williamson. He should come down a row and ask Paul Hutchison and he will get a much better answer. Paul Hutchison can probably explain to the member how this bill does exactly the opposite of what he just said in his speech what Mr Auchinvole said in his speech and what Ms Wong said in her speech. 
I know that Pansy Wong is into archaic technology so I am not surprised that she supports this repeal. If she pops by my office which used to be her office she can have back her cassette Walkman which she left in the drawer. So I am not surprised that Ms Wong has a kind of sentimental attachment to the technologies of the past. I can forgive her for supporting this legislation. It is quite nice to have a traditionalist in the party—there is nothing wrong with that. 
Mr Auchinvole’s contributions in debates are always extraordinary. I must admit that I look forward to them and I worry when it looks like he will not take a call. I am pleased that he is to be the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee because his contributions in this House on those issues during this Parliament are even better than his contributions in the previous Parliament. I think it was in his second reading speech that he was sounding very much like Max Bradford. He got quite wound up quite animated and he started giving the old Max Bradford spiel which leads me to ask whether anyone has actually seen Chris Auchinvole and Max Bradford in the same room. With a little bit of work it could actually happen and I think it is something Mr Power might want to look into. 
Hon Simon Power 
: I will get the officials to look into it. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: That would be a very good idea. 
I come back to process. During the Committee stage the Minister in the chair Gerry Brownlee was surprisingly very low on energy—ironically given the bill. He was yawning throughout the entire process. He was sleeping. My colleague Jacinda Ardern pointed out that he had a picture book in front of him. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: That was his briefing note made especially for him. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: That is fine—to each their own. I do not pass any judgment on that. But it would be nice if the Minister was here in the House at the winding up of this debate. I suspect he is in his office praying for an energy crisis soon so that he can blame it on the previous Government. He has spent all this year praying for an energy crisis praying that we would run out of electricity constantly questioning the Minister of Energy in the House and hoping that the mere semblance of his asking the question would indicate that there was some kind of crisis coming. He is probably up in his office hoping that within the next few months there will be some kind of energy crisis that he can blame on the previous Government and thereby come up with some kind of reason for having passed this legislation. 
It was disappointing that during the Committee stage the Minister in the chair did not take a call. This is important legislation. It is being rammed through the House under urgency. It does not need to be. There is no rush. There is no reason why this legislation like every other piece of legislation we have dealt with so far under urgency could not have gone to a select committee so that those who are affected those who have an opinion and those who perhaps know a bit more than the Minister God forbid could have their say. I know that Mr Power is very proud that coming up we have the first piece of legislation that the Government is sending to a select committee. If I am not wrong it is Labour Government legislation that has been carried over. 
Hon Simon Power 
: No it’s not actually. You should read it. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Watered down. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: That is right—it has been watered down. I congratulate Mr Power on coming up with the first piece of legislation to go to a select committee. I do not actually think it is something to be proud of which is what the member who just raised that point thinks. I do not think it is something he should tout— 
Hon Simon Power 
: Why did you congratulate me? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I tell Mr Power that I was being facetious. I do not think that— 
Hon Simon Power 
: Oh really! It’s so hard to tell. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: The member will learn; he will learn. I think it would be easier if Mr Power always assumes I am being facetious unless told otherwise. 
I do not think it is a good idea to stand up and say that it is good that we will soon have the first piece of legislation to go to a select committee. A bill not going to a select committee is meant to be the exception rather than the rule. It would appear that under this new National Government that is not the case. 
This bill which repeals the thermal moratorium is not going to a select committee. All that the moratorium did was provide a 10-year restriction on baseload thermal generation because Labour members think that if New Zealanders are going to stand up on the world stage and talk about climate change we actually need to have done some action and not be all talk. We have heard lots of really nice words in the Speech from the Throne and from members opposite about how much National believes in climate change. Maurice Williamson has actually started emphasising the word “believe” when he says it: “I believe in climate change.” 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: I believe I believe! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am afraid that actions speak louder than words. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Alleluia! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: He has had a road to Damascus experience. But I am afraid that actions speak louder than words and we have sat in a Parliament that over the course of 2 weeks has wound back every single piece of climate change legislation put in place by the previous Government—and not just legislation but policies like the $1 billion retrofitting of houses which would have seen cleaner drier healthier houses. We hear a lot of talk in this House expressing concern about the health of our young people and the way that they perform at school but no one draws a link between that and cleaner drier houses which mean that children are not sick and can go to school and that when they do go to school they are actually able to learn and to benefit from it. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: It is common sense. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: It is common sense but members opposite do not see that link. The other advantage is that it is good for the environment. Again one would have to question why the National Government which claims to believe in climate change and claims that it wants to do something about it has wound that back. 
We are not quite sure what is happening with the emissions trading scheme select committee. We are not quite sure whether it has stalled has been suspended or is carrying on. I think that foresters deserve to know exactly what the situation will be and what will happen further down the track. The National Party members say new legislation will be passed by September. Well anyone who has seen the terms of reference of that select committee knows that it will be very difficult for it to do justice to the foresters and report back in time for a bill to be passed by September. 
So what are we seeing? More environmental back-downs. We should not be surprised about that because National Governments have always backed away from the big issues. It has always been Labour Governments that have faced up to the big issues facing the country even though they are not easy to deal with—for example climate change and our lack of savings. What are we seeing in this Parliament? A winding back. I say to members of the National Government that it is very easy to defend the status quo; it is far harder to actually have some vision and deal with the difficult issues facing the country which inevitably are issues that polarise people. We have a National Government that will not take us forward and that at the very best will leave us stagnating where we are. More likely it will have us turbocharging backwards at a rate of knots. 
Hon Member 
: “Retro-charging”. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: “Retro-charging”—I am sorry. I wonder how good that is. 
I listened with interest when Jeanette Fitzsimons was giving one of her contributions after the Hon Dr Nick Smith had spoken. Of course he had given a very energetic—I think that would be a good word—contribution. Jeanette Fitzsimons pointed out that greenhouse gas emissions grew under the 1990s National Government and that they grew faster under the Labour Government—and Dr Smith was enthusiastically nodding—and then she pointed out that that was because of stronger economic growth under Labour. Then Dr Smith started shaking his head so hard that I thought it was going to fly off. He did not get the point. Well it has become clear to me that this National Government’s programme for dealing with climate change is to drive economic growth down. We have seen the removal of the research and development tax credit we have seen the removal of the biofuel obligation which was helping our innovative bioenergy companies and our savings through KiwiSaver have been cut. I bet members—in fact I guarantee—that we will have the Hon Dr Nick Smith standing up in this House and touting a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions because they have damaged the economy so much and claiming that that is a good thing. Well that is a National Government for you.