Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 15 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7284. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Will he take a more ambitious climate target to Paris than the current target in light of new evidence showing “only the most ambitious effort to curb emissions will stop Antarctica’s ice shelves from collapsing”?Hon TIM GROSER (Minister for Climate Change Issues): No we will not because there are going to be 5 years of negotiations after Paris to determine the detailed rules which are extremely important to New Zealand. We will not be changing our intended nationally determined contribution and converting it into a nationally determined contribution until we know what the deal is.James Shaw: Does the Minister accept that if every other country matched New Zealand’s emissions reduction target the result would be 3 to 4 degrees of warming?Hon TIM GROSER: Another example of throwing numbers around without context. The reality is this: given that 80 percent of the emissions in the upper troposphere are carbon dioxide and given that they are by far the most lethally dangerous—they stay around in the atmosphere for hundreds of years—and since they are derived overwhelmingly from the production of energy if the rest of the world adopted New Zealand’s renewable electricity figure of 80 percent the problem would be solved on a global level.James Shaw: So given that somewhat obfuscatory answer is the Minister saying—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I invite the member to continue his question.James Shaw: —that he is prepared to freeload on other countries’ emissions reductions even though New Zealand has also agreed not to allow more than 2 degrees of warming?Hon TIM GROSER: I am not absolutely sure that I understand the question but we will take a position in Paris that is absolutely fair and reasonable and contribute to the conference in many other ways than just a number on a piece of paper.James Shaw: Given that the combined pledges of the world’s Governments currently lock the planet into 3 degrees of warming at which point Antarctica’s ice shelves will collapse why will the Minister not show some real leadership and increase New Zealand’s target?Hon TIM GROSER: We have been watching the Green Party in recent days on this Antarctic issue. What has happened is that a New Zealand climate change scientist has come out with a study that my science advisers tell me is consistent with the one of the working party of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is the institution that provides the collective science for the world. There is no inconsistency in this report. I can elaborate further on this issue but what strikes me as extraordinary is that it takes this finding which says that it is likely that sea levels will rise between 28 centimetres and 98 centimetres and then adds on the top of this a headline saying that the Government plans to melt Antarctica. When you think about the idiot’s position that the Green Party has just put itself into over the Trans-Pacific Partnership you have to ask yourself whether it ever worries—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister is now wandering from the answer.James Shaw: So is the Minister aware given how closely he has been watching the Green Party in recent days that the Science magazine report states that losing the Antarctic ice shelves could mean that in 30 years New Zealanders will every fortnight experience floods as devastating as those that hit Wellington and Whanganui earlier this year?Hon TIM GROSER: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientists tell us including their predictions of what will happen on the Antarctic ice sheets that the sea level will rise between 28 centimetres roughly what happened in the previous 100 years and 98 centimetres. They say that if more dramatic action occurred on the Antarctic ice shelf it could have the effect of increasing that by a few tenths of a metre. Well a tenth of a metre is 10 centimetres so a few—I do not know what they mean precisely—is presumably less than 50 centimetres so it could be between 48 centimetres and 1.2 metres. That is the basis of the science. There is nothing new in this whatsoever.James Shaw: So is the Minister therefore saying that the report in Science magazine underpinned as he said by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report says that although the sea level rise itself may be a mere 10 centimetres that does not mean that we will see flash flooding and extreme weather events?Hon TIM GROSER: No that is not my view. My view is actually consistent with the substance of the member’s question. New Zealand does need to prepare better for a higher number of extreme weather events so in that sense the answer is that I agree with the underlying point the member is making.James Shaw: So to recap does the Minister agree that if every country had a target for emissions reductions as low as ours then not only could we lose Antarctica but also the Pacific Islands New Zealand’s coastal communities global food supplies and more?Hon TIM GROSER: No I do not agree.