Smith Nick: Resource Management (Climate Protection) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Smith Nick: Resource Management (Climate Protection) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2310] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 In the House this afternoon I want to recite the little ditty “ten green bottles whenever they shall fall” to illustrate just how shambolic this Government’s climate change policies are. Environmentalists say it is a mess business says it is a mess and even Government-friendly commentators like Rod Oram say it is a mess. This week we even had Dr Kevin Patterson a senior Government official resigning because it is such a mess. National was tempted to support the bill because Parliament probably will have to clean up the Government’s mess but the bill actually goes in exactly the wrong direction. Tony Blair who was in New Zealand today has said—quite rightly—that climate change requires a global response because it is a global issue. Yet this bill says we will make councils responsible individually for this huge issue of global change. 
I want to illustrate the nonsense of the Government’s policies. People will recall that back in June 2003 the Government announced an animal emissions levy—my green bottle No. 1. It did not last 4 months. The Government was going to charge 72c for every cow but that little green bottle did happily fall. 
Then we had the Minister responsible for Climate Change Issues saying we should not worry because $500 million of carbon credits was available to us if we went ahead and ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Well we all know that that little green bottle went crashing into the deck. 
Then the Government announced with great proclamation its energy efficiency target. It said that within a period of 10 years there would be a 20 percent improvement in energy efficiency. It also acknowledged that without doing anything at all it expected improvement of between 0.5 percent and 1 percent per year. Well we are 5 years down the road and as the select committee found out it has not made an iota of difference. We have seen only a 2 percent improvement in 5 years which is less than what the Government said we would have if nothing occurred at all and the Government has abandoned its Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy of 20 percent over 10 years. 
Then we had the Government’s bold renewable energy target. The Government said that under its climate change policy it would get 30 petajoules of extra renewable energy over 10 years. It also said we would get 1.5 petajoules per year by doing nothing. We are halfway down the track—and how much do we have? We have 4 petajoules out of the 30 promised—which is less than what was to be achieved by doing business as usual—and the Government has managed to abandon that little green bottle as well. It has gone down the tube. 
Then we had the big daddy—the carbon tax. The Government announced 3 years ago that the linchpin of its climate change policy would be a carbon tax. Well we all know that went up in a ball of flames as well. That was No. 5 bottle down the tube. 
Then we had the policy to get rid of emissions from big industrial producers. We had the negotiated greenhouse agreements where the Government would sit down and talk with big industry players. But of course that policy was totally predicated on the carbon tax. Why would any industry negotiate a greenhouse agreement if it were not for the fact of a carbon tax? In fact those that have signed the greenhouse agreements are now saying they want an out because the Government has abandoned the carbon tax. So our sixth little green bottle on negotiated greenhouse agreements has gone down the tube. 
Then we have the projects for reducing emissions where the Government has tendered surplus credits so that we can encourage reduced emissions. But that policy too has had to be abandoned because there are no surplus emissions to tender. So bottle No. 7 is down the tube. 
Then we had the overall target. The Government said its overall policy goal in 2002 was that we would stabilise emissions by 2012 yet the Minister said in the House yesterday that that was quite unachievable in the overall policy goal. There is another little green bottle down the tube. 
Then we have the 10 percent forestry cap. The Government said it would stop 10 percent of deforestation which was a substantive part of the climate change argument. Now it has accepted that that goal has turned to pickle and it has abandoned its 10 percent forestry cap. Little green bottle No. 9 falls over. 
Then we have this bill and this bill is truly remarkable. The Government introduced and passed legislation only 2 years ago to take climate change out of the Resource Management Act and today it is voting for a bill to put it back in again. So bottle No. 10 falls over. What is so hideous is how the Government can expect there to be any credibility for its climate change policies when it introduces and passes legislation to remove climate change policy from the Resource Management Act and 2 years later votes for a bill to put it back in. Is it any wonder that every commentator across the board environmental and economic at the conference being held less than a kilometre away is saying the Government’s policies are a mess? We on this side of the House do take climate change seriously. The Government has made a farce of that policy and it is a mess. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.