Carter David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Carter David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5510] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 I am glad of the opportunity to make some comments on what should be a very important debate. It would have been a golden opportunity I think for the Committee to hear some sensible criticism some constructive ideas from the Labour Opposition but on this occasion we did not. I can offer some advice to Mr Cosgrove and to Mr Cunliffe: when members have very little to say it is silly to take a second consecutive 5-minute call and continue the shrill. 
I congratulate our members—Amy Adams David Bennett and Sam Lotu-Iiga—on brilliant contributions to the debate. I also pick up on the contribution from Dr Russel Norman. He correctly pointed out that one of the biggest challenges we have to face in the near future is around climate change. He correctly analysed the three things the Government must consider: ways to reduce our emissions ways to increase the sinks in New Zealand—in other words the planting of trees—and our preparedness as a Government to buy credits from overseas. Dr Russel Norman is quite right. 
But I take exception to his comment suggesting that ACT and National MPs are going around the agricultural sector saying that climate change is “bunkum”. The ACT Party can speak for itself but under no circumstances is any National member of Parliament I know of going around the country telling farmers that they have nothing to worry about with climate change. That is simply not fact I say to Mr Norman. I probably have more contact with farmers than any other member in the National caucus simply because I am the Minister of Agriculture and I can tell members that farmers are on board and prepared to face the challenges. They know that the climate is worsening. They know that they face challenges. What they are looking for is solutions. At this stage we can cut emissions in agriculture in one way and in one way only I say to Dr Norman and that is to cut the number of stock we run in New Zealand. I do not advocate that which is why this Budget seriously addressed the amount of money we are putting into research. We are putting money into this area through the Budget. Funding the Primary Growth Partnership was one of the most important things we faced in the Budget. We need time to find solutions. They are not available now but in no circumstances can that member argue that the National Government does not accept climate change as being one of the most important challenges we face. 
We had Mr Cosgrove saying that National was using the recession as an alibi. I say to Mr Cosgrove that he needs to wake up smell the roses and realise where we are. Whether or not the member wants to recognise it we are facing the most incredibly challenging economic conditions the world has faced for 80 years; I tell Mr Cosgrove that there is no way—no way—that New Zealand is immune from that. In fact the situation for New Zealand is worse in that after a decade of mismanagement and lost opportunities by the previous Labour Government we were in a recession even before the rest of the world had caught up. We do face challenges and this Budget was a very balanced Budget in order to accept those challenges and to face them. So for Mr Cosgrove to come into the Chamber and suggest that the current Government thinks that the recession is an alibi shows how out of touch the Labour caucus is. He suggests that we are being smug on this side of the Chamber but I suggest that he will remain in Opposition for many many decades yet if he remains as arrogant as he was in his contribution tonight. 
We must deal with reality. What Dr Michael Cullen presented to the nation in the pre-election fiscal update was the revelation that we faced 10 years of deficit. That was the legacy of the management of the economy by Dr Cullen and the Labour caucus. So it was important that we balanced this Budget carefully and that is why it was balanced. It still increased borrowing but it did it with care to make sure that we were not downgraded by Standard and Poor’s because that would have affected every business in New Zealand. It would have affected every homeowner with a mortgage. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: That’s who it was for—not the people of New Zealand. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Steve Chadwick may not care about that but I as a member of the National caucus care about it deeply. There are a large number of measures. Those members opposite who are interjecting are also critical of superannuation.