Jones Dail: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Jones Dail: Climate Change Response Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20398] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 In considering this bill one must ask the question: will this bill or for that matter a carbon tax improve our climate in New Zealand? The answer is no. There is nothing in this bill that will improve our climate. There is nothing in a carbon tax that will improve the climate in New Zealand or for that matter the rest of the world. As we know the major emission problem we have is the flatulence that comes from cows and sheep. They are responsible for more than half of our total greenhouse gas emissions. 
If we bear in mind that our proportion of all of this is 0.2 percent and if the rest makes up more than half then we are less than 0.1 percent in world standing. Whereas it could be said that a country could lose 0.2 percent in some countries’ roundings most countries would not even recognise a loss of less than 0.1 percent. As far as this particular legislation and that concern affect New Zealand those facts are absolutely irrelevant to us. This bill does nothing to reduce the flatulence of cows and sheep. I ask the next member who stands to speak in support of the bill to tell me how it does just that because that is our problem. It does nothing to affect that. 
As far as New Zealand First is concerned we made it clear we would proceed with the implementation policies for the Kyoto Protocol that are aimed at reducing certain greenhouse gas emissions only in order to ensure they are in harmony with those of our major trading partners and once a coherent plan has been formulated to allow the appropriate targets to be reached. Well this bill is no coherent plan. As we all know our major trading partners do not support the Kyoto Protocol and they have not finally ratified it. In referring to our major trading partners I am referring to the United States China and Australia. They are not bound by the protocol. China is not affected by it at all and the United States and Australia have not given their final ratification. 
The  
Guardian 
 stated—and I take issue with the  
Guardian’s 
 headline; it had better be more careful—“New Zealand first to levy carbon tax”. New Zealand First is not levying any carbon tax but I take the  
Guardian’s 
 point—“New Zealand first to levy carbon tax.” The  
Guardian 
 makes it clear that it is an experiment and that the rest of the world will observe us as we experiment our way through that particular solution at great cost to the New Zealand taxpayer damaging small business and suchlike. As the  
Guardian 
 correctly states we produce about 29 percent of our electricity from gas or coal-fired power stations. What will that do to the cost of electricity when these things are introduced? 
Just where in this world is New Zealand situated and just what effect does anything we do have in so far as gas emissions are concerned? If we look at our little globe we see that New Zealand is at the top of the world. Some people call it the Southern Hemisphere but we are at the top of the world. I ask my colleague to hold up for members a map of the world. How many countries south of the equator are bound by the reduction of emissions in line with the provisions in the protocol? How many countries south of the equator are bound by the protocol? Only New Zealand is. How many countries in Africa are bound by it? 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: None. 
DAIL JONES 
: Which country in the entire Americas is bound by it? 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Canada. 
DAIL JONES 
: Only Canada. Mr Shirley can move to the top of the class. Which country in Asia is bound by this particular protocol? 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Japan. 
DAIL JONES 
: Only Japan. Those are the only countries. No country in Africa is or in the Americas except Canada. No country in Asia is except Japan and of course one might add the Asian part of the Russian Federation. That is all. And we are binding ourselves into something like that! What effect does our less than 0.1 percent have on the rest of the world after one takes out the flatulence aspect of it? Absolutely none whatsoever. 
Here we are again wasting time on legislation that the Minister obviously cannot understand. She is losing her cool once again. We are wasting the time of the House on something that will have no effect at all on the world’s climate. It will of course help Prime Minister Helen Clark’s standing in relation to her next job at the United Nations. It will move her up in standing and when the Labour Ministers go overseas and have their cups of tea etc. with other people and when job applications are on the way they will say: “Yes we’ve really signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and down there in little old New Zealand our efforts will reduce emissions right throughout the world.” Our emissions will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the rest of the world. We have less than the roundings of other countries which would not even take into account the amount we have to offer in that respect. We should of course try to reduce our emissions and New Zealand First is concerned that any action taken should ensure an improvement. But this bill gives no example of how anything can be improved for the benefit of the environment. Of course we must not forget that we live in the roaring forties that New Zealand is one of the windiest countries in the world and that our various emissions tend to get blown away into the ocean where I am sure they cause no particular damage. 
It was interesting to read the recent report from the Pew Centre on Global Climate Change that stated: “A relatively small number of countries produce a large majority of global greenhouse gas emissions. Not surprisingly these countries tend to also have large economies or large populations or both. Indeed most of the largest greenhouse gas emitters also rank amongst the most populous countries and those with the highest gross domestic products. An analysis of emissions change over time underscores the importance of population and GDP drivers of emission growth. The significant diversity among the major emitters is to be noted and the group includes almost an equal number of developed and developing countries as well as economies in transition. There are 25 countries with the largest of GHG emissions which account for approximately 83 percent of global emissions. They range from the United States with 20.6 percent of global emissions to Pakistan with 0.8 percent. If the European Union is counted as a single entity it and four other largest emitters the United States China Russia and India contribute 61 percent of global emissions.” I shall just pause at that point. 
So the European Union the United States China Russia and India contribute 61 percent of global emissions. Which of those five are part of the Kyoto Protocol treaty? Only the European Union and Russia are. The United States China and India are not. China is now very close to being the second most polluted country on our planet just a short way behind the United States. China is one of our major trading partners as is the United States. Here we are giving more and more opportunities to those other countries to out-trade us. India is not far behind. As the Vegetable and Potato Growers Federation stated just the other day: “This type of legislation and the tax is likely to see some growers forced out of business particularly those within the greenhouse industry. The overall legislation and especially the carbon tax will do considerable harm to small business.” 
The legislation achieves absolutely nothing in so far as the forestry sector is concerned. Looking at it from a Maori viewpoint it is a contemporary Treaty of Waitangi claim. That is what this Government has created. It is taking away Kyoto interests of Maori incorporations in forests selling them off and doing what it cares to do with them just as a typically socialist Government would do. We have covered that in the first reading. So here is a contemporary Treaty of Waitangi claim coming up in this type of legislation. 
We cannot possibly support legislation that has no benefit to our environment. It damages our economy and in the long run it damages small business. New Zealand First opposes this bill.