Roy Eric: Imprest Supply Debate 
Roy Eric: Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:628;Page:462] 
ERIC ROY (National—Invercargill) 
: 
 It is a great feeling to be back in this House after 3 years of absence. Some people might say though that I need some counselling for coming back. There are a number of pertinent issues that I will raise on this my first opportunity. However given that this is my first opportunity to speak in this Parliament I will keep the salutations brief because of the time constraints of a 5-minute speech. I convey to the presiding officers my congratulations. I wish them both wisdom and fortitude in the rulings they make because the perceptions in which the public holds this House depend very much on the manner in which it conducts itself—and that is the responsibility of the presiding officers. So I wish them well. 
I also acknowledge at this time the man I replace Mark Peck and wish him well for the future. I am sure it is proper and appropriate that we wish him well in his fight to beat the demons that have demonised his life over the last period of time. We wish him well and trust that he can get on top of the particular problems he has had. 
I was content to leave here—that is the way politics works. But a short time after I had been at home in Invercargill I saw a march that was necessitated by the Labour Government’s first breach of a promise. That breach occurred when Labour was re-elected after the election previous to the last one. Labour had made an absolute commitment on the hustings that agriculture would be exempt from the carbon tax of the Kyoto Protocol. But before very long I was standing and observing a march of significantly irate people from the primary production sector—a march under the name “Fight Against Ridiculous Taxes” or “FART”. That was the first breach. 
I have to say that I was a convert in the 1980s to the notion that a carbon trading credit was an appropriate way forward. By about 1994 I had seen the light because that particular regime would do nothing to solve the problem. I do not want to get into the debate about whether there is a problem. I accept that the world is getting warmer. Whether it is getting warmer faster than by a natural cycle I do not know but I believe that mankind has done a number of things in the burning and consumption of fossil fuels that must have an impact. So we have a responsibility. I am appalled then that we are continuing with the notion that the Kyoto agreement will solve the problem. It is now actually a charade because last week in the House the Minister of Finance Dr Cullen said that $380 million could not be replaced without applying some cuts or raising the money somewhere else. So the carbon tax has nothing whatsoever to do with solving the greenhouse problem; it is purely a revenue-gathering mechanism. 
I am absolutely appalled at that. I do not know why the country at large has slowed down on its “fart tax” programme because it is indeed a ridiculous tax. It is also a breach of a contract that was made through a mandate promised in the 2002 election. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: It’s a plunder. 
ERIC ROY 
: It is absolutely a plunder. The member is quite right. The crucial problem is that when such a tax is applied the primary wealth creator is the one that pays. Everybody else can pass it on. 
Although the members opposite have been in a phase of self-congratulation and self-adulation over their success in regaining the Treasury benches I just say that they should note that a blue tide began moving during the last election campaign—and that movement will not be complete until this Government is removed. The Government should take a warning: the primary production sector is the first down. Its members are a wise group of people who know that this Government is bereft of ideas and that a socialist programme is leading this country absolutely nowhere.