Mackey Moana: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — Second Reading 
Mackey Moana: Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:18091] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 What a telling speech from the National member! I am not sure that the Hon Bill English mentioned climate change once in that entire speech on an emissions trading scheme. He did not mention climate change once and I can only imagine that he is in the Chamber debating this because as with the Working for Families package he does not believe that his leader John Key could possibly understand a system as complex as this. I say to National members that we are again seeing classic Crosby/Textor—if National members cannot debate the issue they attack the process. It is telling that we have just heard a 10-minute speech that did not even mention climate change. 
As a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee which worked on this legislation I thank the officials. They did an enormous amount of work. They worked incredibly hard to meet the requests of the committee and I think they did the public sector and their various ministries proud. I acknowledge all the submitters who came along and submitted on this very important legislation. We had very robust debate with a number of them but all of them were very very appreciated. 
I acknowledge the chair of the select committee Charles Chauvel because it was not an easy process for him to go through. He faced filibustering and delay tactics the entire way through. I was not going to raise this matter because the important issue is the emissions trading scheme but National members would spend an hour and a half at the beginning of every meeting complaining about things then after wasting all that time they would complain that we had to cut down time for submitters. Charles Chauvel did a fantastic job of chairing that committee. 
I also point out that the select committee heard from 161 submitters during 58 hours of hearings. We spent 58 hours in hearings on this bill yet National members say the process was rushed. We all spent 58 hours listening and taking on board what was said. Before that more than 100 public meetings and hundreds of stakeholder meetings were held. It has been a thorough process. We have been working on emissions pricing for 9 years and it is completely ridiculous for National members to stand up this House and try to invent some excuse and say the process was rushed. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: From a party with a secret agenda. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: As my colleague says that is from a party with a secret agenda. Bill English got up and said that the Government is not telling people things. This is the man who is going to sell Kiwibank eventually but does not want the public to know. I think he has a cheek. 
We have to say again and again that the cost to taxpayers comes from the Kyoto Protocol not from an emissions trading scheme and that cost will remain whether or not we have an emissions trading scheme. The difference is that if we have an emissions trading scheme we will be able to put the responsibility for reducing emissions on to the people who can make a difference. The average taxpayers can do a lot of things. They can try to be more energy efficient and do all the things we are going to do through this $1 billion fund for energy efficiency. But when it comes to our big emitters it is those people—those big emitters—who have the power to make a change and this legislation will give them the incentive to do so. The Government will help them to do it and if we do not do it the cost will still be there—and who will pay? The taxpayer will pay. The taxpayer will pay $400 million out of general taxation. 
National members are going all around the country promising to spend more money. They are promising not to cut any services but they are promising to cut taxes. They will need a lot of tolls on the Auckland Harbour Bridge to pay for $400 million worth of Kyoto deficit emissions. 
David Bennett 
: Talk about the legislation. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I tell Mr Bennett that I am talking about the legislation. 
That just goes to show that National members do not take this issue seriously. They need to tell the people of New Zealand where the cuts will come from in that $400 million if they do not support an emissions trading scheme that makes us able to reduce our emissions and put the costs where they can be dealt with. If National does not tell people then I can tell people where the cuts will come from. They will come from the sale of Kiwibank more cuts to the pension cuts to health and the privatising of our education system. The people of New Zealand do not want that. 
National’s agenda was secret but it is not secret any more. That is how National members will pay for the Kyoto deficit because of their complete inability to support any legislation in this House that does anything to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. We have heard a lot of emissions from that side of the House about how those members think it is really important but they are not prepared to do anything. 
David Bennett 
: You’ll be the only omission from this House girl. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: David Bennett thinks it is funny. I am certain that David Bennett does not understand this legislation—I look forward to hearing his speech next. 
It is a bit galling to be lectured by National members who called the Kyoto Protocol a hoax said they were suspicious of climate change and are now expecting us to believe that somehow they will be the saviours of the country when they have become only recent converts to the science themselves. 
I acknowledge what the member from ACT says. At least those members are honest about the fact that they do not believe that climate change is an issue. One of the National members at the select committee was very very keen on all the submitters who came along and said that climate change is not real. But the fact is that it makes good economic sense to do this anyway. Even if one does not support the environmental reasons for doing this it just makes good economic sense. 
We have been lectured by the National Party about this legislation being really bad because power prices and oil prices have gone up. That is right—fossil fuel prices and thermal generation prices have increased. They have gone up while we do not have an emissions trading scheme so it makes good economic sense to take our economy away from its dependency on fossil fuels and to provide an incentive for renewables which we are able to do in this country—we have the ability to do that. It makes good economic sense as well as environmental sense. Why the National Party would not want to do that is absolutely beyond me. I suspect that maybe some of the money that is being channelled through its secret trust comes from people who have interests in this area and do not want National to do that. Maybe those members might want to tell us a little bit more about that matter in their coming speeches. 
This bill is very important and complex legislation. But if we do nothing then the implications for our country are far far worse. This legislation is ambitious—it covers all sectors all gases—but one of the things that came out during the submissions was that that was what submitters wanted. They wanted an all-sectors all-gases approach. They felt that that was a level playing field and that if we are to go down this route then we need to do that. We are working with our Australian counterparts as they develop their scheme. I believe Australian Treasurer Wayne Swann who said that the two systems could work together and are heading in the same direction more than I believe the scaremongering from the National Party which is looking for any excuse not to support this legislation. 
We need to point out that we are not Australia. Our emissions profile is completely different from that of Australia. Therefore the scheme we set up needs to be based around New Zealand’s needs and New Zealand’s challenges not Australia’s challenges. I know that National members never want to be leaders on anything and that they just want to blindly follow whatever Australia does even if it is not in New Zealand’s best interests. 
The reality is that agriculture makes up nearly 50 percent of our emissions profile. If we ignore that as the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment told us at the select committee we will be the target of import taxes against our products from other countries and other areas that have included their large areas of emissions while New Zealand excludes its own. What we have done is transition all our industries in. We are transitioning them into this scheme and that was the subject of a lot of debate because a number of submitters wanted us to go a lot further a lot faster. We in the Government felt that we needed to transition through into this. We need to make sure that our economy goes in without the huge shocks that we have seen when we have gone through other major changes and the fact is that we have done that through the allocation process with the free credits and through working with the agricultural sector. 
I finish by pointing out that only Labour-led Governments face up to the big issues that face this country. These are not easy issues to deal with. These are major major issues. National Governments never do anything. They come up with their excuses and their reasons—in this case six excuses—why they should not have to do a single thing. National leaves it up to Labour-led Governments to make the hard choices and then if National gets into Government it tries to take the credit for what Labour has done. 
We in the Labour Government are not scared of the challenges facing our country. We are not scared of facing up to the reality of climate change and the reality of being a small open economy in the global market. The Labour-led Government will continue to lead this country in the area of climate change along with those other parties in this Parliament that care about this issue. I would say to National members that if they were to spend half as much time and energy on actually working to find solutions as they do on working to find excuses not to do anything then this country would be a much better place.