Ardern Shane: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
Ardern Shane: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:18153] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 I respect your wisdom in making that call Mr Chairman. I start by saying that Lockwood Smith put his finger on the issue—that is we cannot estimate what the damage to this economy will be because first of all we have no science to substantiate what the effect will be. That is the bottom line and I would be interested to hear from the Minister in the chair the Hon David Parker. But I say to members that in my herd of dairy cows I see a big variance. One cow can eat 18 kilograms of dry matter per day and produce 1 kilogram of milk solids and another cow can eat 15 or 16 kilograms of dry matter per day and produce 2 kilograms of milk solids. I would like the Minister to take a call and explain to me how in one herd of cows we can see as big a variance as that yet according to this legislation something like 50 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture. I just say to the Minister and to the Committee that it is not correct and cannot be based on science because the variance is so great. 
I say also that no one has explained to us so far how changing forest from one area of a dairy farm or from a meat and wool farm to another area has a detrimental effect. How does changing land from forestry to viticulture from flat very fertile land that is suitable potentially for viticulture—for example the area where my colleague Nick Smith comes from—and replanting somewhere else have a detrimental effect on the environment? I would like to know the answer. 
I have another question for the Minister. How does it help the climate if we put a tax of the level that he spoke about of $8000 per year on a meat and wool farm of 5000 stock units as proposed in this bill and therefore that farm reduces its production and because of a world food shortage that production is picked up in Europe where three times the carbon emissions from that production will result from that transfer? Certainly it does not help the international climate one iota. I just say to the Minister that he will have to answer these questions at some stage during this debate because they certainly have not been answered so far. 
How is it that we can have a forestry sector that has been in decline—the single biggest area that would help in this issue of carbon sequestration to meet our carbon commitment under the Kyoto Protocol—during the whole 9 years of this Government? The industry has submitted time and time and time again to this Government and has also submitted extensively on this bill through the select committee process suggesting ways to turn that industry round and achieve the goals that the Minister is asking for so how is it that the industry has not had one of its concerns addressed in this substantial legislation? That is another question the Minister can take a call on any time he likes and give an answer to the House because I know there is no answer. 
It is abundantly clear to National that the forestry provisions under this bill are seriously deficient. That is what the National Party minority report said and I agree entirely with it. I cannot understand how the Green Party can support something that clearly is likely to have a negative environmental impact not a positive environmental impact. There is one thing about the Greens. They stick to a series of principles—or they have until now—that are environmentally enshrined. Whether we agree or disagree with them at least the Greens have that bottom line. On this the Greens have broken it substantially. They have crossed that line. I listened to the speech of the co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons and I thought: “You have been severely compromised.” I cannot understand how she would allow herself to be dragged to that area. 
There is an urgent need for a fresh process of engagement with the forestry sector to develop a far more sound and practical approach to greenhouse gas emissions and plantation forests. That is what the National members on the select committee said in their minority report and they are absolutely right.