Beaumont Carol: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Beaumont Carol: Climate Change Response (Moderated Emissions Trading) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 24 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:8049. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I too rise with great sadness given the response of National and the Maori Party to what has to be the most fundamentally important issue facing the world today. We are seeing this afternoon in this Chamber a bill being passed that weakens the provisions that this country had already put in place to play our part in dealing with the issue of climate change. There is increasing evidence that the changes taking place will change the world as we know it. Many examples have been given of the consequences for human life for human habitat for our animals and for the future of this planet. This is a serious issue yet we are addressing a bill that weakens those provisions. It is environmentally irresponsible economically inefficient and socially inequitable. 
I think as have others that this bill needs to be renamed. I have a couple of suggestions. I thought perhaps the “Climate Change (Responsibility Transfer Costs from Polluters to Taxpayers) Bill” might be a possibility or the “Climate Change Response (Missed Opportunity for Cross-Party Consensus) Amendment Bill” because those titles are more accurate reflections of what we are facing here today. 
Our response as a country should be to put in place a strong scheme to deal with emissions. Instead we are weakening the response of the previous Government. This legislation which modifies Labour’s emissions trading scheme and is being passed under urgency is fundamentally flawed. In fact as others have argued so cogently it may have the perverse effect of increasing emissions and it will undoubtedly load costs on to ordinary New Zealanders. 
The criticisms of this bill come from all quarters. I think it is worth reflecting on some of these criticisms although I know for certain that the Government will arrogantly dismiss them because of course they are right. Brian Fallow stated: “The changes agreed are all about transferring cost from the emitter to the taxpayer and to that extent it defeats the purpose of the exercise.” Greenpeace stated: “We now have on the table a pathetic ETS which won’t actually do anything to reduce emissions … our emissions will just keep climbing and taxpayers rather than polluters will have to pay for them.” Rod Oram stated: “National’s changes would drive up emissions perpetuate old technology necessitate ever-greater subsidies and reduce New Zealand’s international competitiveness and reputation.” The New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development stated: “Overall this proposed policy appears to greatly reduce incentives to heavy emitters to reduce emissions increase costs of subsidies to them slows down the timetable for reducing emissions …”. The Institute for Policy Studies stated: “It does not provide a path forward to decarbonise the New Zealand economy in an efficient effective or equitable manner. It will barely reduce emissions. It imposes high costs on the economy for the benefit of a favoured few.” 
I repeat the phrase “for the benefit of a favoured few” because that is what the essence of these changes is all about. It is about transferring the cost from polluters; whether they be Maori or Pakeha polluters they are having their costs transferred on to ordinary taxpayers. 
What about the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment the independent Officer of this Parliament with the role of reviewing environmental policies and actions? The commissioner commented: “New Zealand should not align itself with Australia’s proposed scheme. A cap on the number of carbon credits freely allocated is vital to create the right incentives and to reduce fiscal risk to the Government and policy uncertainty for business. The phase-out of free carbon credits is far too slow.” 
Criticisms have come from every quarter yet the Government intends to push this legislation through. National with the support of the Maori Party will today push this legislation through the House. The process has also been flawed. I will not go into detail but I know that my colleagues have raised the fact that this is probably the worst process they have been engaged in in their parliamentary careers.