10. Question No. 10—Climate ChangeSIMON COURT (ACT) to the Minister of Climate ChangeQuestion No. 10—Climate ChangeSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. To the Minister of Climate Change—Hon Member: You need to cheer up!SIMON COURT: —does he agree with economist—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member still addresses me. If he wants to have a cosy chat he doesn't need to do it at question time. Start again please.10. SIMON COURT (ACT) to the Minister of Climate Change: Does he agree with economist Matt Burgess who said that further policies are not necessary … Cap-and-trade schemes like the ETS effectively neutralise other emissions policies"; if not why not?Hon JAMES SHAW (Minister of Climate Change): Before I respond directly to the member's question I do want to note that Mr Burgess is a parliamentary staff member for the National Party and I don't believe it's appropriate to bring staff into parliamentary debate. However as the member has asked the question my answer to the first part is: no and to the second: because he is wrong. I note that Mr Burgess' boss Nicola Willis said earlier today in the emissions budget debate that "We continue to believe that the emissions trading scheme will be a very important part of how emission[s] reduction[s] is achieved. We also acknowledge that there will be a very important place for complementary policies alongside the emissions trading scheme—for example catalysing the market around networks such as in electric vehicle charging and potentially in other areas."Simon Court: Has the Minister received advice on how much the additional policies proposed in his emission reduction plan will cost the average New Zealand household and if so what did that advice say?Hon JAMES SHAW: Well there are now three more sleeps until the—four more sleeps until the member gets to see what's in the emissions reduction plan.Hon Member: You give me a lot of confidence now!Hon JAMES SHAW: I will give the member an example—sorry I haven't had a great deal of sleep at all recently so I'm not really counting. I will give the member an example of how policies that get introduced outside of the emissions trading scheme actually reduce costs on households rather than increase them as he is positing. For example the recent Clean Car Discount programme that was introduced by the Hon Michael Wood has led to a 300 percent increase in the importation of electric vehicles into this country. If you wanted to achieve the same result using only the emissions trading scheme (ETS) that would mean that the ETS unit price would need to be just shy of $600. The distributional impact of that on households in New Zealand is actually unacceptable. So complementary measures are a way of ensuring—SPEAKER: Order! I'm sure it is of a lot of interest to the House but there's already been one debate today in this area. I'm sure we're going to have some next week and notwithstanding the broad invitation in the question the limitations on length of answers aren't waived by very open questions.Simon Court: Point of order Mr Speaker. The question was quite specific: had he received advice on how much his proposed plan would cost the average New Zealand household? I don't believe he responded to that effectively.SPEAKER: Does the member believe—did the Minister; well he went around the block on something else or something close to it. I think he could probably give us an answer which was about one word long.Hon JAMES SHAW: Mr Speaker yes.Simon Court: Can the Minister guarantee that the cost of additional policies under his emissions reduction plan will not add to the increasing costs Kiwi households and businesses are already dealing with?Hon JAMES SHAW: As I've just said at some length many of the policies that we're introducing in order to reduce emissions actually have the effect of reducing household costs. For example the home insulation scheme which has seen tens of thousands of houses insulated over the course of the last decade or so has reduced household energy bills dramatically and made those homes much more energy efficient. If you wanted to achieve the same result by driving up the electricity cost just through the emissions trading scheme that would mean that actually many people just switch off the heating and freeze. I would ask that member whether he wants New Zealanders to freeze.Hon David Parker: Has the Minister seen any reports as to whether the ACT Party voted for or against—SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order!Hon David Parker: —the emissions trading scheme (ETS)?SPEAKER: Order! The Minister might have been dressing it up but he was inviting the Minister to comment on something for which he doesn't have responsibility. It was a nice try but we're not going there.Dr James McDowall: Point of order Mr Speaker. I'd actually like to hear the answer to that.SPEAKER: Sorry?Dr James McDowall: I'd actually like to hear the answer to that question.SPEAKER: Well if the member was a bit more experienced he'd be having an early Thursday all right? So he's had his warning.Simon Court: To the Minister does he agree with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's climate policy which has returned billions in carbon tax refunds to Canadians—SPEAKER: Order! Just—question all right? Not a speech in the middle of the question.Simon Court: —carbon tax refund to Canadians to help Canadians adjust to this new reality and if so will he support ACT's policy of giving a $250 carbon tax refund to every New Zealander every year?Hon JAMES SHAW: No. I do not agree the ACT Party's policy. However I will say that actually it is nice to see that the ACT Party is engaging with climate change policy in at least reasonably serious terms. On that earlier today Mr Court waxed lyrical about Kenworth trucks—SPEAKER: No no no. Further supplementary? No? All right."