Chauvel Charles: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:7928. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 It falls to me to begin the debate on behalf of Labour in the Committee stage on this legislation. I want to speak to one of the Supplementary Order Papers that has been lodged in my name Supplementary Order Paper 94. If the Minister for Climate Change Issues truly wants the debate that he has called for—and I have to say that history belies that intention but let us give him the benefit of the doubt for the moment—then we will have a proper consideration of the Supplementary Order Papers that lie on the table. The Supplementary Order Papers that have been tabled by the Greens and Labour reflect by and large the recommendations from independent authorities such as the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and other independent experts who appeared before the Finance and Expenditure Committee and who gave us the benefit of their advice about how we could improve what is a bill that is lacking in general analytical integrity. 
Supplementary Order Paper 94 does two things: it deals with national targets and it deals with the advisory committee on climate change that we are keen to see. In relation to national targets it is clear that we are obliged under our Kyoto obligations to make a nationally appropriate contribution to international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. That is a treaty obligation to avoid the worst consequence of human-induced climate change. In the current round of negotiations as members of the House will know New Zealand under the National Government has made a conditional offer of what is called a responsibility target. The greenhouse gas emissions reductions that that target calls for are between 10 and 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 if there is a comprehensive global agreement at Copenhagen. New Zealand has also made a unilateral unconditional offer of a 50 percent reduction in emissions to below 1990 levels by 2050. 
Labour has reflected on those targets. It does not think that they are bold enough. They should be considerably stronger. But having said that I say that Labour does not want the targets to simply be statements of good intention. So the first thing that this Supplementary Order Paper does is enshrine the targets in the law and it requires the Minister to take steps to ensure that those targets are met. 
The second key substantive thing this Supplementary Order Paper would do if the Committee supported it would be to try to avoid some of the controversy in the development of climate change policy that the Minister alluded to in his speech just now. It is true that there is not a cross-party consensus as there is in Europe on some of the key issues at stake. We have all experienced hearing from the many stakeholders in the debate about the insufficient level of independent analysis of the costs and benefits of climate change policy initiatives. I found myself in the rare position in the second reading debate of agreeing with everything that Rodney Hide said on that topic in his speech which was a good one. 
Jo Goodhew 
: You want an emissions trading scheme and he doesn’t. How does that stack up? 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: But the select committee process—which Jo Goodhew did not appear in at all I think but other members opposite did—that we have just been through shows how important it is that we should have this proper independent level of analysis. It shows that complaints about its absence are quite justified. 
The other part of this Supplementary Order Paper would establish an advisory committee on climate change. It would be an independent Crown entity it would provide advice to Ministers and it would promote an informed public debate on the public policy response to climate change. The committee would be required to consult all affected parties before it tendered its advice to the Minister. If the Minister is serious about the pious words that he uttered while on his feet earlier he will have his party consider this Supplementary Order Paper with great care and determine the position that National ought to take on it. It is my submission that this is the sort of legislation that we ought to see in this area if we are serious about wanting a consensus in this country. 
I will now talk to the structure of the Supplementary Order Paper. It would make two changes to the existing administrative provisions of the principal Act the Climate Change Response Act to increase transparency in policy making. First of all there would be a requirement on the chief executive of the Ministry for the Environment which is the inventory agency under the legislation to produce an annual long-term forecast of emissions and removals of greenhouse gases. The suggestion in the Supplementary Order Paper is for a 50-year range of projections. The Supplementary Order Paper would provide that in preparing that forecast the chief executive would have to act independently from the Minister and apply his or her best professional judgment to the task. 
Just to make sure that the process was transparent the chief executive would be required to consult with the advisory committee which would be set up under the second part of the Supplementary Order Paper on the methodology that he or she proposed to use and then publish the committee’s views as a result of that consultative process. Then the Supplementary Order Paper would require the Minister and the chief executive to seek and consider the advice of the advisory committee before any regulations or Orders in Council were made under the legislation. Again for the sake of transparency all that advice would be laid on the table of the House of Representatives; all members would be able to see it. If regulations or orders were made that contained provisions different from the advice the Minister would be required to present a statement to the House setting out the Minister’s reasons for not agreeing with the advice. Those are the two things that I am hoping to see. 
As far as targets are concerned the Supplementary Order Paper would insert a new part 6 into the principal Act. It would set national greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets. The proposal is that we would aim in the legislation for a 50 percent reduction in net emissions from 1990 levels by 2050. I have deliberately put the National Government’s target in there because I want to test whether National is serious about this sort of legislation. If Labour were in office it would be bolder. But in the hope that the Government might support the amendment if it actually puts in place its own target I have left that one there. Let us see whether the Government is willing to stand by that target by agreeing to legislate it. 
To provide greater certainty for the pathway toward the target the Supplementary Order Paper would also require the Governor-General in Council to set a series of intermediate targets which would apply for 5-yearly periods commencing in 2013. Although the amendment would allow for some flexibility around the intermediate targets the suggestion is that the intermediate target for one period must not be higher than the target in the immediately preceding period. Net emissions in 2020 must be at least 10 percent lower than the 1990 baseline. Net emissions in 2050 would have to be 50 percent lower than the 1990 baseline. To increase the possibility of political consensus the Supplementary Order Paper would require any order setting a target to be confirmed by an Act of Parliament by 1 July in the year after it was made. 
We are trying to set in place a transparent process of consultation. Under the Supplementary Order Paper the Minister would have to publish a draft target together with a statement explaining why that particular target had been chosen. Public submissions would be made to the expert advisory committee. It would have to consider the Minister’s reasons in any submissions received and report back to the Minister before the target was set. The committee’s advice would then be presented to the House. If the target that was finally set contained provisions that were different from the advice in the committee the Minister—again in a mirror provision to the provision on expert advice—would have to explain to the House in a statement why it was that that difference occurred. 
As well as setting national targets the Supplementary Order Paper would require the Minister to develop proposals and policies that the Minister considered would enable the targets to be met. We would not just have those figures plucked out of the air; we would have genuine open transparent processes by which we would see what policies would achieve the emissions reduction targets that the Government adopted. Whenever a new target was set on an intermediate basis the Minister for Climate Change would have to present a report to the House on the proposals about how to reach those intermediate targets and also how they would contribute to the ultimate reaching of the final 2050 target. 
I mentioned earlier that the Supplementary Order Paper also aims to establish an advisory committee on climate change. It would be an independent Crown entity. Its principal objectives would be to provide independent advice to the Minister on matters relating to the public policy response to climate change and to increase the effectiveness of public participation in the making of policies and laws in this area. One of the problems we have in this whole policy area is that it is all too hard. People’s eyes glaze over when we talk about emissions trading. We would try to have an open expert body proceeding in a way that contributed—[ 
Interruption 
] I will finish the call shortly— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I know that I have given the member the call but I think the House has taken an instruction that no member will take more than two consecutive calls. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: I thought that under the leave provided that requirement had been waived for this debate. Am I wrong in that? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The Government would be happy for the member to seek leave just for this individual call. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: My mistake. We had better do this properly. Will you seek leave? 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: Yes. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Leave is sought. Is there anyone opposed to that course of action? There is not. Leave has been granted just for this one call. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: I appreciate the indulgence. I will try to conclude in relatively short order. I was just making the point that the committee would help to increase public involvement in the debate which is something that I think we all agree is needed if we are going to have enduring climate change policy. 
In relation to its advice the committee would have to report to the Minister by 1 December 2011 on whether the national emissions reduction target of 50 percent in net emissions below 1990 baselines needed to be altered. This report would be timed to allow the committee to have regard to the outcome of the current round of international negotiations on climate change. The committee would be required to provide advice to the Minister on the intermediate target to apply in every 5-year period commencing in 2013. Before providing advice the committee would have to consult with affected parties in an open and transparent manner. There would be annual reporting by the committee on the progress being made in meeting New Zealand’s emissions reduction targets. 
In conclusion as it is currently worded the principal Act requires the Minister to establish a panel anyway to review the emissions trading scheme established by the Act. The Minister has to do that every 5 years. My Supplementary Order Paper would amend those provisions to require that review to be conducted by this expert standing committee. The committee would be given more independence than the panel in setting its terms of reference in respect of any review although the Minister would be empowered to require that the committee would have to consider specified matters as they arose in the international negotiations or otherwise. The bill would require the committee to consult with the public during its review. Once the review was completed the Minister would be required to present the committee’s report and the Minister’s response to the House. 
This Supplementary Order Paper is an attempt to set up a transparent process for reaching targets enshrine the Government’s own 2050 target into law and put in place structures designed to facilitate a national consensus around climate change policy that is badly needed. I hope it receives the support of the Committee.