O'Rourke Denis: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Climate Change Response (Removal of Transitional Measure) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11411. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First): I want to make two preliminary comments and the first is to acknowledge Minister Bennett’s admission that this measure is only one small step—important in itself but one small step—and that much more is needed. We totally agree and that is the approach that all of the other parties in the House are taking of course. In that light I would also like to endorse Megan Woods’s call for a cross-party approach to the development of a strategy for some real actions on climate change. And I think James Shaw has just echoed that sentiment in his speech.We all want to move as fast as we possibly can to tackle this most serious of all problems facing humankind but my endorsement of that approach is subject to a caveat and that caveat is simply that we all need to listen to each other. So Labour and the Greens need to listen to the other parties that may not necessarily agree with every aspect of their argument. We need to listen to each other so that we can gain some degree of consensus so that those real actions that we want to see actually happen.Following on from that I want to make this perfectly clear: New Zealand First does want a more cautious approach to agricultural emissions than the Labour Party and the Green Party have taken. Although agricultural emissions are very significant for New Zealand and must not be left out of any future strategy to reduce our emissions profile overall we cannot move too far ahead of competing agricultural exporting countries simply because we would be likely to become uncompetitive and that would be a problem. The damage to our farming community and exports simply could not bear some of the measures that some are wanting to take very quickly.So I would ask Labour and the Greens to acknowledge that and to also acknowledge that as a matter of fact the European Union which is the world’s largest agricultural producer by far has no primary food production commitment so far as emissions are concerned—at all. Think about that. And neither by the way has another huge producer the United States of America. The truth is that New Zealand farmers are already the most carbon efficient on earth—already some way ahead.Bearing that in mind although we do want progress as far as agricultural emissions are concerned we cannot push that envelope too far without doing too much damage. As a matter of fact until the European Union and the United States of America start to move we should not stick our neck out too far. I note in that context that James Shaw was content to follow. He said that in one of the speeches: as long as we do something as long as we make progress we should be content to follow. So that is the approach I think we should be taking as far as agricultural emissions are concerned.I would like to point out too that the Observer published an article only last Sunday on the front page and the headline was “Eat New Zealand lamb and save the world”. That shows that they understand that New Zealand agriculture as far as carbon is concerned and as far as emissions are concerned leads the world. That reinforces what I have been saying. Yes we do need to make progress with agricultural emissions and yes it does have to be a major part of the strategy that we are calling for and yes we do need to try to develop a consensus amongst the parties to take actions as part of that strategy.The other parties Labour and the Greens need to listen to us and I think to National which seems to be saying roughly the same thing—that as far as agricultural emissions are concerned we actually need to be a little bit realistic. It does not mean a lack of commitment; it just means a degree of realism.In any event if we follow New Zealand First’s prescription we do not really need to move too fast on agriculture because it would form part of what we want to see as the first area where we would take action and that would be the whole area of transport. We want to see transport targeted early and actively and effectively. We want to see electric cars encouraged. We want to see electric buses and trucks which are now under development being incentivised. We want to see the main trunk railway in New Zealand completely electrified. We want to see light rail introduced with Government assistance in the main centres. In fact we want to encourage all public transport. We want to see the New Zealand railway system completely redeveloped so that it would become a modern efficient and effective system and would thereby make a major contribution to reducing our dependence in this country on fossil fuels.That is the priority for us but as I have said we do need to develop a consensus. That means all parties listening to each other and listening to I hope what I have been saying. We will certainly be listening to what others are saying as well with the possible exception of David Seymour who is unlikely to make any contribution whatsoever. However having said that we will nevertheless try to work with other parties. We do want to see a comprehensive strategy developed. This is one very minor first step not enough in itself and I agree with the Minister that a lot more needs to be done. So let us get on with it.