Smith Nick: Estimates Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Estimates Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 04 August 2011. Volume:674;Page:20376. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Climate Change Issues): I am delighted to talk in this estimates debate on climate change. Does it not speak volumes about the level of confidence there is in the Government’s policy around climate change that neither the Green Party nor the Labour Party want to take a single call? I think that says the policy is actually in really robust shape that there is a high level of confidence about the Government’s policies and ultimately that they are working. Let me go through a number of ways in which they are working including in terms of how that will flow through to 2011.One of the key objectives for the Government is to reverse the awful deforestation that occurred during the term of the previous Government. In this year we are dealing with officials estimate there will be 5700 additional hectares of forest. Let us compare how that works. In the previous decade there was a huge increase in deforestation; the worst period of deforestation since records began in the 1930s was under the previous Government. So when we introduced our policies around climate change we wanted to reverse that and we have achieved just that with an increase in afforestation for every single year we have been the Government and that is continuing on into this year.A second key objective for the Government and our climate change policies is that we think we should be producing more of our energy from renewables. New Zealand is actually more privileged than most countries in that regard. What actually happened was that during the term of the previous Government we saw a constant decline in the proportion of electricity that was renewable. Most of the power stations that were builtunder Labour were thermal fossil-fuelled power stations. In the last year we have seen a huge improvement in that regard. It is as impressive as this: a fivefold increase—Hon Member: How many?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —a fivefold increase—that is a 500 percent increase—in the amount of consenting for renewables.Brendon Burns: Isn’t that unbelievable?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: It is very unbelievable. Mr Burns says it is unbelievable. It is unbelievably good and that is what we get under a National Government. The interesting thing is this: in terms of this future year we are expecting to see and the Government is budgeting for an ongoing improvement in the proportion of renewables and that is to be celebrated.The third element is of course—and this is absolutely pivotal to estimates—what the cost to taxpayers will be of meeting our Kyoto obligations. Again let me show members how it works. Under the Labour Government emissions increased by 23 percent. This was the Government that campaigned on being carbon neutral that said when it came to Government it would reduce emissions by 20 percent—Hon Steve Chadwick: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I again repeat that this debate is about the estimates in the Budget. I have not heard one word about Budget investments since this year of 2011.The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): I will overrule that. I think the member is making comparisons and projecting—looking forward. I think he is in the zone.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: They are so sensitive because their record is just so ugly. Let me tell members the advice I received when I became Minister for the Environment. It was that if that emissions track continued the cost to the New Zealand taxpayer of meeting our Kyoto obligations—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I simply ask for your clarification. In responding to my colleagues and giving your ruling to my colleague’s question about relevance to estimates you made a comment in respect of that that I assume means the Minister was adhering to the Standing Orders by talking about forward-looking estimates. But you used what we could probably call new parliamentary language and said he was “in the zone”. I just want you to interpret that—The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Please sit down. That is rather trivial. The member has surmised correctly.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The key issue in the estimates is how much the New Zealand taxpayer will have to pay for New Zealand to meet its Kyoto obligations. And the answer is absolutely not a penny. Do members know why? Under the first 2 years of the emissions trading scheme our emissions have stopped going up; they have gone down. And they have gone down so well that New Zealand will comfortably meet its Kyoto targets and that is absolutely good news for the taxpayer. Rather than having to write out a cheque for $485 million to countries around the world—Dr Cam Calder: How much?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The cost to New Zealand without the emissions trading scheme would have been $485 million. But as a consequence of having the scheme in place emissions are down we are meeting our targets and that is extra good news—extra good news! While the Māori Party is in the House I will acknowledge that the only way this Government has been able to get that scheme up and running get emissions down get the investment in forestry and get the investment in renewable energy is that the Māori Party had the wisdom to back a sensible pragmatic emissions trading scheme that is working for New Zealand that is working for Māori and that is ensuring we meet our environmental obligations. I simply say how proud this Government is of the sensible progress it has made and over the course of dealing withthe emissions trading scheme review and working forward our objective will be to maintain that balance of minimising costs and maximising progress on this important issue.Vote agreed to.