Tisch Lindsay: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
Tisch Lindsay: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:18166] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 It is interesting that the Government wants to move a closure motion when today we have witnessed an abuse of the parliamentary process by which it has introduced 785 amendments—785 amendments—without the consultation and the scrutiny that we would expect in a select committee. That has been a complete insult to this Parliament and now the Government at this hour wants to move a closure motion. Well we will not have a bar of that. 
We have some very important points we want to articulate. One of the things that has come out of this is that no calculations have been done about what this scheme will really cost. We have heard various figures mentioned by speakers. The Minister said that if one has a property with 5000 stock units then the cost is about $8000. We have heard other figures floated around and then the Green member said that agriculture is excluded until 2013. What she did not realise and was not prepared to say was that farms do not run on thin air. One has to put fuel in one’s tractors and one has to have power and a cost is associated with that. 
I will focus on emissions from agriculture because in my area in the heart of the Waikato agriculture is a significant player in our economy. There are a number of possible options for managing emissions. I will just go through and mention them. They could have included project-based trading regulating controls levies voluntary measures or—as in the case that this bill looks at and supports—the emissions trading scheme. 
Let us consider these options in turn even though some of them are not in the bill. What is project-based trading? Eligible individuals businesses or organisations could propose emissions reduction projects to the Government. These projects would be variable. They must be emissions reductions additional to any reductions that would otherwise occur. The key issue in a project like this on a base trading process would be in setting the benchmark. What would be the benchmark against which projects are measured and how would it be assessed? This would have to be done on a business-as-usual basis. 
We heard earlier in the debate before the dinner break that we do not really know how to assess what the projected emissions will be. There is no certainty in it. They will all be set only as an estimate. Dr Lockwood Smith referred to this point earlier in the debate. One can only estimate emissions. There is no certainty but the bill claims that there is. 
The second option for managing emissions could have been regulating measures. These could have included controls on stock densities on the number of stock units per hectare on fertiliser usage and on pasture management. This option could also have referred to the retirement of some land from agriculture. 
The third measure for managing emissions could have been levies. This could have provided for the Government to levy farmers to recover the costs of emissions permits if they needed to be purchased. Mind you that is not to say that in the future this devious Labour Government will not have that one ring-fenced and that it would not bring it in if it needed to. 
The fourth measure could have been voluntary measures relying on voluntary non-financial measures. However relying on voluntary measures alone would leave the Government with an open-ended liability for any emissions that exceed the 1990 levels. Research is the key to reducing emissions and I know that the agricultural sector is receptive to this approach. 
But what this Government has embarked on is the emissions trading scheme. Emissions trading brings with it uncertainty for agriculture because the price of emissions permits cannot be accurately predicted and it can vary from time to time. The question has been asked as to what this will cost. We have not heard the answer to that question. As emissions can be only estimated the situation creates uncertainty. A major issue—