Shaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShaw James: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 15 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6587. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement made yesterday on the flag referendum that “I’ve been very strongly of the view I think it’s in New Zealand’s interests to change and I you know I hope the political parties can see past the petty politics of that”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes and can I commend the member on such a stylish tie.James Shaw: Would he also say that it is in New Zealand’s interests to see past the petty politics that are preventing cross-party consensus on climate change?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Government is always happy to have discussions about climate change but—Andrew Little: Do you like his tie now? How’s the tie looking now?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Thank you. My wife bought it for me and I quite like it too.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Government is always happy to have discussions about climate change but we have over the years developed policies that we believe are in the right interests of New Zealand. We are going off to the 21st conference of the parties in Paris with those settings. But you know in reality even if we had a discussion with the Green Party we would never reach anywhere near its level of ambition because that is at the very outer edge of what I think most people would find acceptable.James Shaw: What is his response to Treasury advice from October last year that calls for greater policy certainty around climate change and says: “Probably the most significant [step] would be to secure a greater degree of political party consensus about climate targets and ETS settings.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I do not recall that specific bit of Treasury advice but I would just caution the member about having Treasury as his poster child because let me assure you that Treasury’s advice to the Government as I best recall was to have a far less aggressive target than the one the Government actually set. It pointed out that the per capita cost to New Zealand was significantly greater than other countries and from memory at one point I think it was at least suggesting that New Zealand’s target should not be a reduction but should be an increase of the 1990 rate.Hon Simon Bridges: Treasury poster boy.James Shaw: I think he does a disservice to Treasury.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I know that it was a response to an interjection on my right. It would be helpful if the member would now just ask his question.James Shaw: I seek leave to table an Official Information Act request from Treasury received by my office yesterday with official advice on important decisions on climate change.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular document. Is there any objection? There is objection.James Shaw: Would he agree with Waikato University management school’s 2013 business survey which found that “Lack of Government leadership has seen companies stop measuring their carbon footprint or put their carbon strategies on hold.” and is it not now time for this Parliament to show this climate leadership?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.James Shaw: Why has the Government chosen to act unilaterally when it comes to setting climate change policy targets rather than build a cross-party consensus like David Cameron’s Conservative Government in the United Kingdom?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have not looked at the process that David Cameron has gone through in the UK but in terms of the Government’s position as the member will accept there are a wide range of implications as a result of the climate change target that is set. We believe we have set that in broadly the right place. We are going off to Paris and we will see what happens as a result of those negotiations.James Shaw: If as the Treasury advice says the business community itself has called for political party consensus why does he insist on playing petty politics with climate change?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Firstly I am not sure that they have and secondly I think the member confuses a consensus in consultation with agreement. I can assure you that if the member wants to see the Treasury advice I am sure that somewhere along the line it can be dragged out of the files but the Treasury advice as I best recall it was to do significantly less than the proposal that the Government is taking to Paris.James Shaw: Why does he believe that it is important to get cross-party support for changing the flag but it is unnecessary for climate change? Where is the statesman in you Mr Key when it comes to the climate?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well look here is an old-fashioned thing: we went to the election with a set of policies and as the Government we carry them out. We are just calling out political parties that went to the Government with the same policy and now cannot work out what they want to do other than play petty politics.Andrew Little: Supplementary question Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr Brownlee’s memory might be shorter than mine.Andrew Little: Will he accept my offer made publicly to meet to discuss ways in which he and I and the rest of this Parliament can restore public confidence in the flag referendum process in order to achieve a result that he wants and that many New Zealanders would also like to see?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am more than happy to meet with the member but the point I would be making publicly is the same point I would make to him now and that is that I am not going to agree to a yes or no referendum—this Parliament voted that down. But most important actually is there are now I think a couple of million New Zealand voters who are quite interested in this process and are interested in potentially weighing up the options. But if they want to decide that they want to change the flag they ultimately need to know firstly what they are going to and secondly in reality we accepted the best advice we could get from the officials which was that unless you have a contender against the current New Zealand flag you are very unlikely to get 50 percent or more of the people involved. The whole way through actually we have gone through a consultative process. If the member wants to do that we are more than happy to have the discussion.