Genter Julie Anne: Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGenter Julie Anne: Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 12 February 2014. Volume:696;Page:15904. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green):Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. As the Green Party spokesperson on transport it is my pleasure to rise to take a call on the third reading of the Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill. This bill has been around for quite some time. In fact it went through the select committee process before I was elected to Parliament. I think this bill was one of the first ones that I sat down and wrote a speech for after being elected to Parliament. So it was about 2 years ago that I first sat down and looked at it.This bill has only just made it to the Committee of the whole House and the third reading in the year 2014 which is somewhat astonishing but I am sure that that is for good reason other than the Government not being able to manage its legislative programme—that is possibly one of the reasons; I am not sure. We support this bill. The first reading speech was given by my former colleague Sue Kedgley who is now a regional councillor for Wellington and my current colleague Gareth Hughes gave the second reading speech. As they made clear and I would like to reiterate the Green Party is supporting this bill. It is uncontroversial. It takes some positive steps in the direction of supporting our biosecurity which many speakers have already talked about this evening. Also we quite approve of the approach of cost recovery—that is internalising some of the costs that would otherwise be externalised and pushed on to taxpayers.New Zealanders value our natural environment. New Zealanders really value our beautiful forests lakes rivers oceans and beaches and I think most New Zealanders if not all of them do want to protect them. They recognise that there is an intrinsic value and it is something that hits right here in the gut. It is something that you cannot really summarise or quantify in a complete way. But it is also possible to quantify the benefits the economic benefits—some of them—of looking after biosecurity. This essential element of our defence against environmental degradation and ensuring that we do not introduce pests and diseases is really important because it is vital not only to preservingthe natural environment that we value for intrinsic reasons but also to ensuring the continued strength of our primary production base.New Zealand’s competitive advantage in the world is really its“clean green” brand and much of our success overseas selling our dairy products to China or promoting tourism around the globe is because we are perceived to have a pristine natural environment. So it is in our economic interest to genuinely look after that environment to invest money if need be in protecting the environment and to ensure that things like biosecurity are at the forefront.But I think that this bill probably does not go as far as it could in looking after all of the potential ways that we could be protecting our environment responding to the challenge of climate change and internalising external costs. The bill obviously has a very narrow focus. It is looking at the processing of international travellers and how we are going to fund that and ensure that we have the means for funding the processing of international travellers. But there are other considerations that arise when we are thinking about how we can look after our “clean green” brand protect our environment and internalise some of those external costs.Unfortunately even though aviation has enormous benefits for humanity—and I personally have benefited greatly from the ability to travel easily and quickly between continents; it is something that is a unique privilege really that not many human beings have gotten to experience in the history of humanity—it also has some costs and particularly in terms of carbon emissions. It is something that may not be able to grow indefinitely. We are going to have to find alternative means of travelling and it may take a little bit more time. We may be able to create alternative fuels that are not going to have such a negative impact on the climate but we are not going to be able to do that unless we put a proper price on carbon.It is absolutely essential that we start to put a price on the harmful emissions that are changing our climate because until we do that the market is not going to respond. People are not going to come up with the alternatives. Humans are incredibly innovative and able to adapt and that is why it is so important for Government policy to take the step of putting an appropriate price on carbon emissions. That is what is going to incentivise solutions. It is going to create a market for coming up with alternative fuels that do not have such a harmful impact on the climate.Unfortunately this Government has not really taken steps that would ensure there is a price on carbon. It says that it is going to respond to climate change. I have yet to see any evidence of any real national coordinated approach even to adaptation to a changing climate which is something that could potentially cost us. If we are going to have increased flooding and increased droughts we need to be preparing for that now. We need to be ensuring that the infrastructure we are putting in place is going to protect our communities in the future given that we know that the climate will be changing.But in addition to that we need to do our fair share in the world of reducing carbon emissions. The best way to do that is to give people alternatives and invest in alternatives. For New Zealanders many of the trips that we make around New Zealand and internationally obviously cannot be easily replaced with another form of transport other than aviation. But most of our carbon emissions from transport are generated in travel in and around our towns and cities. That is where we have the real opportunity. The Government could be investing in alternatives such as safe walking and cycling and public transport—all things that not only reduce carbon emissions but create a more liveable city for people and reduce the money that people have to spend just to travel. Most trips at peak time are quite short distances—less than 5 kilometres—and it is entirely possible to replace those with walking cycling or public transport if the infrastructure is there. It is much more affordable obviously.So on the one hand we have got to invest in alternatives where those are available and on the other hand we also need to internalise the costs. This bill for example internalises the costs of international processing and puts it back on to the people who are travelling. They are the ones who have to pay for the processing—it is not the taxpayers—and so should those who are generating carbon emissions and contributing to harmful climate change have to pay the price of that.If people are facing the true cost of their choices they are able to weigh up the costs and make the decision that makes the most sense to them. For example for me to do my job unfortunately at the moment I have to fly between Auckland and Wellington because there is no alternative really particularly because the passenger train has now been reduced to 3 days a week. There is no overnight train and there is no high-speed train like we might have in another country.I would happily pay that price. If paying that additional cost of the carbon emissions was going to provide the Government with more money to potentially invest in alternatives that would make it easier potentially to travel without generating carbon emissions or to invest in research into biodiesel alternatives. The Green Party supports this bill. We understand that it is incredibly important to look after our biosecurity. It is something that the Green Party has long championed and it is wonderful to see the bill passed in the House this evening.