Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm very pleased to rise to speak in the third reading of the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Reform) Amendment Bill and very pleased to reconfirm National's position which is in opposition to this bill. Duncan Webb was—Hon Nathan Guy: Who?Hon JACQUI DEAN: Well exactly. Hon Nathan Guy: He went down in the list.Hon JACQUI DEAN: Exactly. Duncan Webb chair of the Environment Committee considering this bill gave us what he thought was a grade of D that we should be ashamed of far from it. We are very pleased to stand in this House. We absolutely accept the nomina of D—D for delay for very good reason." It seems to have escaped this "Government of kindness" that we are in fact heading towards not a recession but something much worse than that and we will find out a little later this week how soon and how badly our economy will dip into depression. And what is the industry that is keeping this country's hopes alive? What is the industry that is going to be that industry which carries New Zealand through some very tough economic times in the next year two years three years from now? Well of course we know what it is: it's agriculture.Duncan Webb—and I was surprised that Duncan trotted out this argument when he said that New Zealand is emitting more per capita than any of our neighbours. Well yes but there's numbers and then there's numbers. And maybe what Duncan hasn't considered or maybe has forgotten is that New Zealand's emissions profile of course is skewed because around 50 percent more or less of our emissions come from methane. Those methane emissions come from those very animals in that very sector of our economy which is the sector which is going to enable the next Government to be able to support the social spending that we are going to so badly need over the next few years. The fact that Duncan Webb firstly didn't seem to realise that New Zealand's emissions profile was so very unusual is a little astounding given that he is the chair of the committee but the fact that he would choose to use that figure as an argument for ploughing ahead with this emissions trading bill which will impose cost not just on agriculture—but of course those costs will flow right through our society—is a little puzzling. So if anyone gets a D I award it to Duncan Webb.Duncan Webb also said that this is the right time "because we are in times of change." Yes we are in times of change Duncan Webb. We are about to move into the greatest economic hardship that this country has seen in 160 years. If that fact has passed you by then I would suggest that you and your Government and your coalition partners think again about the impost on bringing agriculture into the emissions trading scheme (ETS) by 2022 by 2025 at farm gate level at processor level. We would suggest that the Government and its coalition partners think again and think again about the importance of agriculture on our economy and how critical it is that we have an agricultural sector that can face the future with some confidence—some confidence—because no other sector can.Tourism can't. Tourism is on its knees. And Mr Speaker I'm cognisant of the fact that I'm straying a little wide of the bill but the point I am making here is that National's suggestion National's—Hon Member: Idea.Hon JACQUI DEAN: National's idea—thank you; that word is important—is that we delay for a year so that we get a sense of just how badly our economy is performing and then make a decision about bringing agriculture into the ETS even more so than it is now.The Hon James Shaw I want to thank the Minister for his engagement with all parties in the House and particularly—and Scott Simpson acknowledged this—James Shaw's contribution to the committee stage of this bill was really very impressive. He has an in-depth knowledge of his subject and is very passionate about emissions trading; it is his reason for being here in Parliament. National has no argument with that. Our point—and James Shaw is quite right: we were always going to be arguing on the point of delaying this for a year—is that this is not business as usual and yes Duncan Webb and the Hon James Shaw there is a wrong time to bring agriculture methane emissions into the ETS and that wrong time is now. Further I would say to James Shaw who asked the rhetorical question: "Why are we passing this bill at a time of profound economic crisis?"—indeed James Shaw why are we? Why are we putting this cost impost on that very sector of our economy who are the ones who will bring us through this very tough time in front of us? We don't know what that looks like. We don't know how hard it's going to be. We don't know how many people are going to become unemployed lose their jobs lose their livelihoods lose their homes lose their businesses. We don't know but we do know that it is going to happen. So why would any Government propose to impose more cost at that time? We say no. We say delay.James Shaw also put forward the argument that every year of delay we make the effort harder. To the contrary Minister. When we are considering methane emissions and the impact of agriculture on global emissions a delay of a year gives that industry a whole year to continue developing the science and the technologies so that we have an ETS system which is led by science. Our agricultural sector is very aware of the impact their emissions are making in New Zealand. What are they doing about it? Well they are investing in science. They are investing in the very technologies that will reduce those emissions. Give them a year—give them another year to work on those technologies.I read just a couple of days ago that there is now a breed of cattle which is shown to have less in the way of methane emissions compared to others. Well that's very exciting because what it will lead to is a breeding programme—just as we do when we're looking for any quality in animals there will be a genetics programme of breeding which will get us closer to the science which will allow agriculture to enter the emissions. What we've got now is a tax. We are literally contemplating today a tax on that very industry of agriculture which is the industry that is going to bring us through this post-COVID world.So yes Duncan Webb yes James Shaw I am very proud to stand up and give a D—D for delay D to allow the agricultural sector to find the science to comply with climate change regulation. I am very proud to stand here today as a rural National MP who is in touch with the farming sector. I was at farmer meetings yesterday. They are very concerned about the essential freshwater package. They are very concerned about that national policy statement for biodiversity. They are very concerned about getting their meat processed. They are very concerned about their own futures and they know that they are the sector that will prevail in getting through this post-COVID world. Do not saddle them with extra cost at this time. National opposes this bill for that reason."