Brownlee Gerry: Appropriation (2002/03 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Second Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Brownlee Gerry: Appropriation (2002/03 Supplementary Estimates) Bill — Second Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:609;Page:6376] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: 
 That was a “Helen please pick up the phone I am still here.” speech from Jim Anderton. How many times has any Minister had to come into the House and put his curriculum vitae before the House hoping the Prime Minister would hear it and decide to keep him inside Cabinet? Jim Anderton is the leader of the Progressive party the party in Parliament known as the “Progressive duet” that is propping up the Labour Government. We had no idea on this side of the House that things were in such turmoil and that Mr Anderton’s security in Cabinet was so thin. 
Quite clearly the National Opposition has been very very effective in sending a message to Helen Clark that poor old Jim Anderton after 4 years of running around the countryside handing out $2000 cheques and getting photographs in all the local papers has to come into the House and present one example of a company that says he is doing a good job. He then went on to tell us that it is doing so well it has tripled and quadrupled its growth in the last 4 or 5 years. The question must arise that if the company is so busy running the business would it not just have decided when one of Mr Anderton’s minions came toddling into its office with a big cheque it did not need and said: “Look can you thank us?’’ to say: “All right we’ll put a bit of an ad in the paper for Mr Anderton.”? That is not a real endorsement of the policy. It is just a simple recognition that it wants the environment for growth in the economy of this country to be as it is and better. And it will be better when this country gets a National Government. 
I want to tell the House that although everybody out there might think the energy crisis has passed this country is in the grip of a very very deep energy crisis indeed. It is not one that is about saving a few kilowatts in our homes every winter but one that will seriously impede the ability of New Zealand businesses to expand in the years to come. When I look at the estimates I do not see the issues that are facing New Zealand being addressed at all. 
The other day the Minister of Energy was questioned about his estimates at a select committee. He was asked whether we were potentially likely to see the 2003 electricity shortage which was due to lack of water repeated in 2004 because of a lack of gas coal and oil supplies. The Minister said he thought the answer was yes. Then he went off as he often does on a series of ponderous statements about whether the Rimu field was going to produce very much how long Kapuni would run and the uncertainties existing over the current Pohokura field. Then he said again that when we consider all those uncertainties the answer is yes. New Zealand in 2004 could be facing the same sort of electricity shortage according to the Minister not because of a lack of water this time but simply because of a lack of the fossil fuels necessary to fire up those big North Island plants. 
What is the Government’s answer to the problem? Because it is a big problem. By the Minister’s own admission some 1250 megawatts of new generation were commissioned in this country between 1996 and 1999 and since he has been the Minister 166 megawatts have been commissioned 105 of which were started and substantially completed under the previous National Government. We have not seen investment in generation in this country for some time. The Minister’s answer is that it is not an issue of generation; it is an issue of fuel supply. But I do not see anything in the select committee report that deals with fuel supply. It does not deal with the shortage of gas or whether enough coal to fire up Huntly is being taken out of various deposits around the country. It says we are going to create an Electricity Commission. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Another committee. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Another committee that will supposedly fix the problem! It states that in particular the Electricity Commission “will contract with generators to provide a dry year reserve generation capacity and fuel. It will withhold these reserves from the market until dry year conditions look likely at which point they will be released into the market at a higher price.” 
The question I have is: where is that reserve capacity now? It does not exist. If the intention when that capacity may be on stream is to hold the spot price down why is the Government going to do that by putting the price of reserve generation up above where the spot price is likely to go? That is the real question that has to be answered. 
How does anybody who has responsibility in this area hold down the price of electricity to reasonable levels if the Government has come along and said it will purchase a reserve capacity at a much higher price and release it into the market only if it is needed? Then the question is: who will pay for that reserve capacity that may never be used? It is the poor old electricity consumer. The Minister says it should not cost any more than half a cent a unit. Half a cent a unit is about $200 million a year and this is from the Government that said “no new taxes no new taxes no new taxes”. Tell that to the pensioners around the countryside who are frightened to turn on the heater—not because they think there may not be any electricity there to supply them but simply because they cannot afford to run their heaters. 
It is an utter nonsense for anyone to suggest that by setting up a committee which is what this group is a whole lot more capacity will suddenly be created for the generation of electricity and that it can be held back in dry years. It just will not work. The Minister himself acknowledged that in a speech the other day where he said the distinction between new generation needed to meet national demand growth which is about 150 kilowatts a year and reserve generation needed for dry years is an important one. So he understands the problem but he is caught up in the Government spin machine that says: “We’ve got trouble here and we need to convince people that we’ve got an answer.” So the Government has gone out with the very silly idea of setting up this big committee. Incidentally I am told that the committee will initially operate using the rules for governance of the industry that have just been rejected by the industry by the consumer group outside the industry and by Grey Power a most conservative organisation that is not known for favouring a market solution but which totally rejects the proposal the Minister currently has on the table. 
As I said at the outset we have a very deep energy crisis in this country. It is not one that will see the lights go out immediately but it is most definitely one that will see New Zealand business unable to expand at the rates that it would like to. New Zealand entrepreneurs who want to start new businesses are unable to do so because there is not good supply. I ask some of the clever members on the other side whether they have looked at how many businesses have withdrawn proposals particularly for timber processing in this country because they cannot get adequate electricity fuel supply. There are a number of such businesses and for Mr Anderton to come in here today and beg the Prime Minister—who is clearly considering giving him the chop—to keep his job on the basis that one firm in the Hutt has said “Please keep him.” really shows how much this Government has its head in the sand and how convoluted its policy is for business development and for fostering growth in this country. It is right out of control. 
Furthermore the contribution this afternoon from the Green Party on the issue of energy should alarm anybody who is concerned about living a good and decent lifestyle in this country. None of us are rabid polluters. None of us are out there attempting to destroy the environment in a free and cavalier way. To suggest that we should not have big generation projects happening in this country and that we should somehow be reliant on wind and biomass is utter nonsense but it does fit very well with the convoluted policy being offered to this country by Helen Clark and her Ministers.