SpeechMARK PATTERSON (NZ First): I rise to support this Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Reform) Amendment Bill on behalf of New Zealand First. I too have a D to throw around that last speech by Jacqui Dean—and that is disgrace". It's the National Party you went over there—Paula Bennett went over there to Paris—Hon Nathan Guy: Oh we've heard all of this before. It's like a broken record.MARK PATTERSON: —and signed us up to a set of targets. Well OK I'll move on from that and I'll move on to the speech from Todd Muller on Sunday where he admonished previous National Governments and previous Labour Governments for not moving fast enough on this very issue. In the very first opportunity that he's got to walk that talk so that he can lead this country—or at least lead his party—he's failed at the first hurdle. That in my way of thinking is a disgrace. This is an incredibly important issue. We do have to make our 2030 targets we have committed to them and we can't afford to just kick the can down the road for another year—that's 10 percent of the time that we've got left to meet those 2030 targets.New Zealand First's view on this has always been that we must do our bit as international citizens. We must address this issue ourselves. We had in the previous Government a scheme where you could buy emissions offsets from offshore—many of them turned out to be fraudulent. That is just not the New Zealand way; we're cheating ourselves and we're cheating essentially the planet. If everyone starts doing that we're getting nowhere. So we've got to do our bit and that's very much been New Zealand First's attitude all along. We will not stand for delay.So this bill as the Minister for Climate Change said it's an incredibly complex piece of legislation. One of the main features of course is the cost containment reserve with the floor and the cap. That cost containment reserve is a little bit like the Reserve Bank perhaps being able to print a little bit of money to bring the currency down just so we can manage that and I think that is a worthy mechanism within this bill: to make sure that that transition that businesses are going to make can be a fair one. Our major industries actually have responded. Fonterra have committed to phasing out their coal-powered stations—(a) because it's the right thing to do and they know they have to do it but (b) because their competitors are. FrieslandCampina the big Dutch dairy company has made an even stronger commitment to make decreases. So if we're not in that game we're not going to be competitive in the long term. We had Mr Simpson talking about actually the tomato growers and how they were going to be disadvantaged by that. Well maybe he should have taken a bit more notice of Ecogas Ltd who got $700 million in funding from the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) and they had teamed up with T&G Global to produce biogas to power up their hothouse. That is the sort of innovation that putting a price on carbon—and a realistic price—and setting that band that companies know that they have to respond to that is exactly the example and sort of behaviour we're trying to drive within this scheme.Of course under the previous administration we had the unit price for carbon going down to $2 or $3 per unit which sends no signal whatsoever. If we were allowing ourselves to open up as we've heard previously to those international units the price would swing wildly and businesses would not know where they're going. So we do need to send those signals and this bill does that.Of course Jacqui Dean touched a lot on the farming side of things and she didn't seem to quite understand—I saw that in the committee of the whole House stage—it's the He Waka Eke Noa where the farming sector has come together and are designing their own scheme which will kick in around 2025 that recognises that the issues for agriculture are different. In the main we're talking about methane which is a flow gas. There is some good reason for the industry to be able to have some more time to design that system so that it is fair and things like maybe riparian planting and sequestration from soil and things can be built in.I was at Invermay just out of Dunedin—just by the way this Government saved that sheep genomics team from being disbanded. I was looking at their sheep-breeding programme there and their methane-capturing boxes that they put the sheep in. They're breeding sheep that are more methane-efficient and they're seeing some quite consistent lines in terms of room and size and how that plays out in terms of methane emissions. So there is good stuff happening. Jacqui Dean alluded to lines of cattle that they're now starting to identify. So genetics is a big issue. Feed additives—and of course the PGF once again has invested in the red seaweed processing and that's showing some promise; as is the 3-NOP. We've got the vaccines that of course are being developed in a world-leading facility out at Massey which is the international centre for developing vaccines. We've got grasses of course being developed with GE technology and fodder crop. So there will be some other tools there; whether we choose to deploy them or not is a matter for another day.But also there is some opportunity in this. If you're thinking of absolute production I think that's where the National Party get let down a little bit in their agricultural space. It's actually about value. This Government's done a lot of stuff around trying to increase value. I actually had the Beef and Lamb New Zealand people in this morning giving a briefing on their Taste Pure Nature country-of-origin provenance brand that they're working with the industry to develop. It's been very successful so far; about a year in and exceeding expectations. What a story we have to tell. We are leading the world on some of this stuff that I just outlined earlier. We have got a story that consumers will want to hear and will be prepared to pay a premium for. Our farmers can be proud of what they're sending offshore. From that side of things there is incredible opportunity and we should not shy away from that.So I guess when we were looking at it one issue that we did have was some concern around maybe the lack of levers within this bill to limit forestry offsets. As Duncan Webb alluded to in his contribution we do not want to have runaway forestry. We can't make forestry offsetting so profitable that it envelops large swaths of hill country; we absolutely understand the potential for that to happen if this gets out of control. So we do have to have that in there.Of course there are the social and economic measures that the Climate Change Commission has taken into account. Minister Shaw has absolutely assured us that that is where that mechanism sits to place some limit should they be seen to be getting out of hand with the forestry offsetting so we are watching that. Of course there is a review coming up and I think that's with the Climate Change Commission and that's something that they will have to I think keep a weather eye on. Finally this has been as referenced earlier an incredibly complex piece of legislation. I think it is six years in its gestation. So could I commend the officials that have been involved in this. It's been a herculean effort.Finally the Minister as well Minister Shaw for your efforts in this you have used your adept political skills to at least get this side all together. I think actually if you asked them behind closed doors the National Party want to support this too but they have decided to take a political position which is incredibly disappointing given the importance of acting in this space. So congratulations Minister Shaw on getting this across the line as it is a massive task. New Zealand First will support this bill through to law because it is quite simply the right thing to do. Thank you."