Wood Michael; Dean JacquiThird ReadingHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): I move That the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time. I'm pleased to be able to rise on this final reading of the bill after we have worked through the previous readings of the bill over the last couple of hours. I do thank members of the House who did engage in the committee stage debate. I do particularly acknowledge Simon Court for the discussion and questions which he put forward in that debate. We clearly have some disagreements about the importance of there being a carbon dioxide emissions' standard to apply to the imported fleet in New Zealand but I did appreciate some of the questions that he asked which I do hope for the benefit of the committee and now for the House and the public do provide some further detail about the substance of the bill that is before the House.In general I think that there has been a good ventilation of views about the Clean Car Standard and this bill over the course of its readings in this House. From the Government's point of view we remain committed to urgent action to reduce carbon emissions in our country. Transport is the second-biggest emitter in New Zealand. It emits 40 percent of New Zealand's carbon dioxide emissions and unfortunately it has the worst trajectory. Transport's emissions have increased by about 90 percent since 1990 far over and above any other sector. Most other sectors have had small increases small decreases and have stayed about flat. Transport's had the worst increase. The primary driver of that has been the growth of our fleet the growth of our light fleet to some degree our heavy fleet and the fact that our fleet internationally is a dirty fleet. The average carbon dioxide emissions of vehicles in the New Zealand fleet and coming into the New Zealand fleet until recently have been amongst the worst in the developed world. There is a very straight line that we can draw between that and the fact that New Zealand is one of very few countries in the world that doesn't have a carbon dioxide emissions standard. Only Australia Russia and New Zealand in the OECD to date have not had a carbon dioxide emissions standard. So this is one of the key moves that we can make to make sure that we rapidly transition New Zealand's vehicle fleet to being cleaner.The benefits of that are manifold. We reduce our carbon dioxide emissions. We give Kiwi consumers a greater choice of clean vehicles to be able to purchase. Those people who are able to purchase a cleaner vehicle whether it is a zero-emissions vehicle like an electric vehicle whether it is a low-emissions vehicle like a hybrid or whether it is even a cleaner petrol vehicle those consumers will benefit from significantly lower lifetime costs for their vehicle as well. So it's an important piece of legislation.The reason this amendment has been brought forward is to make sure that it can be implemented as smoothly as possible. There are two key changes which have been canvassed in earlier readings of the bill. The first provides clarity that motorcycles and mopeds should not be captured by the scheme and for the benefit of the House and those who are listening as things stand if there was no change motorcycles and mopeds would not have to pay charges or receive rebates under the scheme. The requirement simply is that they establish a carbon dioxide account. We after consultation with the industry agree that there is not huge benefit in retaining that requirement and so the simplest and best thing is to remove that requirement to be very clear about that in the legislation. That wasn't the intention of the original legislation. That's something I've acknowledged in the House today. We try to be pragmatic about these things when we get feedback from the sectors that we're working with.The second key change that the legislation makes is for category 2 importers—that is importers that tend to bring in smaller consignments so under the original legislation would receive rebates or pay fees on a consignment basis instead of an annual basis. There is a deferral of their obligations to pay fees and to be able to engage in trading of rebates from 1 January to 1 June. So those fees or rebates will continue to incur through that period; that has not changed. But it is simply the obligation to either pay fees or to engage in trading of rebates that is deferred until 1 June. This is quite an important point. I note the Green Party's position voting against this piece of legislation. It is just important to underscore that this change does not in any way actually affect those obligations and therefore does not in any way reduce the emissions abatement potential of the scheme. It is simply a pragmatic change to ensure that that sector has enough time to be ready to engage with Waka Kotahi's online system to be able to pay those rebates or to engage in trading to pay the charges or to engage in trading of the rebates. So we get the same outcome but we simply smooth the pathway for the sector.From my point of view as Minister that's what we should do. We have to make changes in this sector. We cannot keep doing the same things that we have done for the last 70 years which have led to growing carbon dioxide emissions a terrible impact on our climate. We have to make these changes but if we can do that in a pragmatic way that brings people along and makes it a bit simpler to comply then why wouldn't we do that? That's the purpose of this legislation. So those are the core reasons why the Government's brought this legislation to the House and believes it's an important and good piece of legislation.As I said the debate has ventilated views about the legislation. I do want to respond to some of those views that I've heard over the course of the debate. The National Party's position frankly is a confused one. They have raged and raised multiple objections to action to clean up our vehicle fleet. But they are finally actually supporting the legislation. This reflects the dialogue we've had over the past couple of weeks where they have shifted their position from not supporting and then supporting—I can't remember quite the order—the Clean Car Discount eventually saying that they do support a Clean Car Standard then being a little bit unclear about what kind of Clean Car Standard they do actually support. Either way it is some progress. They voted against this legislation initially. They spoke against there being a Clean Car Standard in place when this legislation was brought to the House. But they have through the course of this debate confirmed that they do support the framework of the standard and that is a positive move. We will be a dumping ground for the world's dirtiest vehicles without this policy. So we do need to move it forward and implement it in a pragmatic way. But further in respect of the views that have been ventilated in this debate the problem that we have here is that we have another party in the House and that is the ACT Party who is voting against this legislation that remains trenchantly opposed to any action to reduce emissions beyond the emissions trading scheme mechanism including the Clean Car Standard.Simon Court: That's right.Hon MICHAEL WOOD: The member confirms that is an accurate conveyance of that party's views. So what New Zealand needs to understand is that they can rely on this Government to make the policy changes to reduce carbon pollution but any alternative Government with the National Party and ACT Party working together would pull down all of the progress that we have made to clean up our vehicle fleet—Simon Court: That's right.Hon MICHAEL WOOD: He confirms that's right. That would be the price of the ACT Party coming into Government. They oppose this very strongly. They even oppose this bill which is a pragmatic way which responds positively to what the sector has asked us to do. They are so trenchantly opposed to action—positive action on climate—that they would even oppose this legislation which smooths the way and makes it easier for the sector to comply with the Clean Car Standard. That is how dogmatic they are in their opposition to the Clean Car Standard in any of these policies. So let's be clear that under an alternative Government all the measures that we have put in place to make clean cars more available and cheaper would be gone and clean cars would become more expensive and more scarce under a National-ACT Government. That has effectively been confirmed in the debate today. And what the public can see through the Government's passage of this piece of legislation is that we do remain committed to cleaning up our vehicle fleet. And let's just remember the benefits of that: less carbon pollution more choices for consumers cheaper lifetime costs for consumers who get into cheaper vehicles and actually much cleaner air for people. The Health and Air Pollution in New Zealand 3.0 report which was released in July on the impact on transport emissions on human health reveals that we have 2200 New Zealanders who die prematurely each year because of air pollution caused by the transport sector. Around 13200 cases of childhood asthma caused by that carbon pollution. So there are multiple reasons why it is extremely important we move forward with a carbon dioxide standard. That is what our Government is doing. That is what we would not get from an alternative Government. This piece of legislation is a pragmatic way of implementing that to make sure it can be implemented smoothly by the sector. We get all of the benefits—the over 1 million tonnes of carbon abated between now and 2050. We get all of the benefits of that under this bill but we simply have a smoother way of implementing it for the sector. The sector has welcomed that publicly and I thank them for the pragmatic way that they have worked on that. I thank all parties in the House who are supporting this legislation. As I said at the beginning of my first reading speech it's Doughnut Day in Parliament. The National Party have now doughnut-ed" on this one but it's a positive move that they're now supporting the Clean Car Standard. I hope they keep making "doughnuts" and actually become a climate-friendly party at some point in the future. I commend the bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the motion be agreed to."