Genter Julie AnneHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. The Green Party absolutely supports an inquiry into what happened on Monday night. It's very important that New Zealanders and particularly vulnerable New Zealanders are able to rely on our electricity system. I will speak about this specific issue but I also will need to speak about the larger issue that needs to be considered when we think about how we are going to respond to what happened on Monday night. On Monday night there was incredibly high demand higher than usual. Transpower almost got it right in their forecast: 7100 megawatts. I just want to make the point that it's not just about generation; it's also about the things we can do to influence demand and to reduce the need to rely so heavily on electricity in times like this. So for example there are 31 million inefficient lightbulbs currently in New Zealand homes. If all of those had been replaced with appropriate LED lightbulbs it would have reduced the peak load demand by 781 megawatts bringing it down to 6300 megawatts which the system would have easily coped with and it's really interesting to hear members from the National Party acting like this is some sort of outrageous thing to say—like wouldn't it be better for New Zealanders if they had access to these appropriate efficient LED lightbulbs which would have significantly reduced the amount of peak load but it also reduces their own energy bills? So I mean clearly there is a bit of a barrier to people switching from inefficient lightbulbs to efficient ones. They cost more initially but—[Interruption] Sorry Mr Speaker I just—[Interruption] So I have an astounding number of idiotic comments being made at me—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: —and it's infuriating. SPEAKER: The member will resume her seat. Interjections Mr Brown should be rare reasonable and preferably funny and you've scored none out of three. Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: So just to be clear the Green Party's position is that the Government could be out there buying people these efficient LED lightbulbs in order to not only reduce peak demand but to benefit those New Zealand households because then they would have the light they need and they'd be spending less on electricity bills. It's just the kind of simple solution that apparently right-wingers find impossible to get their heads around and that's why we haven't had intelligent investment in efficiency over the years that we had a ridiculous National Party Government between 2008 and 2017 who did less than nothing and actually made our situation worse when it comes to actually preparing for the big issues that are facing us. The other issue—[Interruption] It's just very trying to have to deal with such ignorant comments constantly in the House. So my comments will stand: 31 million inefficient lightbulbs. If they had been replaced with appropriate LEDs the peak load demand would have been 781 megawatts less. That's 6300 megawatts—it's pretty substantial. I think most New Zealanders would think that is an intelligent investment for us as a country to make that doesn't require generating more electricity but it delivers benefits to New Zealanders in their houses and also benefits to the system as a whole and that's something we could easily be looking at. I will continue to suggest to the Minister that we find a way to promote these efficient LED lightbulbs in the short term because obviously people across the House are very concerned about how we're going to deal with electricity demand in the short term while we build up our long-term capacity of renewable and our ability to store renewable generation. Basically the other big event that happened on Monday night was of course the publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report which was unequivocal on the need to transition as rapidly as possible to zero-emission electricity generation. That does mean more efficient energy use and it means as both the head of the International Energy Agency and now the Secretary-General of the United Nations have said that for countries who are serious about contributing and pulling their weight in the fight against climate change which is now an existential threat to people who are already alive today—it is an existential threat to our children—we cannot be looking for new fossil fuels. So the idea that the problem that we had on Monday night is going to be solved by increasing the supply of fossil fuels in the market whether that's gas or coal is simply not possible. That is not consistent with a habitable climate. So the people who are calling for that solution are in deep denial about what the scientists are telling us and about the alarm bells that they are ringing. It is literally impossible for us to find more fossil fuels and use that to generate electricity in the future and have a habitable climate or be pulling our weight and having a habitable climate—those two things are not possible. What is possible—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm just going to ask the member: this is not a debate about climate change and I'd like the member to come back to Monday night and the events. Thank you. Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: I'm very happy to do that but it was Monday night that the IPCC report was released. It was Monday night that we had the—SPEAKER: Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't referring to the events of Monday night with the IPCC report. I was referring to the blackouts that occurred and that's what this debate is about. Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Yes and how we solve the blackout is not by finding more fossil fuels and using more gas. That is simply not possible if one accepts the science. One thing that I found really interesting in this debate is Barbara Kuriger's continued insistence that it's the Minister that needs to be held ultimately accountable for operational decisions made by a range of players including partially privatised energy companies and State-owned enterprise lines companies when clearly the moves made under the last National Government were to make energy less and less something that would be influenced by the Government of the day and yet when something goes wrong they immediately say Oh well it's the Minister's fault." Now I am absolutely in favour of greater Government direction when it comes to our electricity and energy systems because we have a collective problem here that we need to solve and it actually is quite difficult for the Government to have an energy strategy when we have partially privatised "gen-tailers" who are now more focused on chasing profits for private shareholders than anything else. It's very difficult to see when there is that level of market concentration in the generation space—it's very very difficult to see how the profit motive for private shareholders is going to lead to the "gen-tailers" providing more affordable more renewable and more secure electricity generation. So clearly the mixed-ownership model is not something that has helped New Zealand avoid this situation. It's something that makes it harder for the Government to respond and set a direction of public good and ultimately that is what this debate is about. It's about the impacts on the public when there are difficulties in forecasting demand and bringing enough generation on board and if making private profit is the focus of the "gen-tailers"—thanks to the National Party and I'm sure the ACT Party would have liked to go further when it comes to the privatisation of our electricity system—then it is simply not possible that we're going to get the outcomes we want as a country if the "gen-tailers" can make more money from not bringing on new supply and ensuring that there's sustained high wholesale prices over a long period of time. Certainly a lot of small retailers are making that case. We would like to see the Electricity Authority with more of a mandate to investigate and to ensure that there is structural separation between the retail and the generation parts of these businesses—if nothing else separate reporting of both retail and generation—and that we can see transparency on price of transfers. Hon Grant Robertson: Mr Speaker? I think it's me. SPEAKER: Oh—the Hon Grant Robertson"